idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-02.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 12 instances of too long lines in the document, the longest one being 1 character in excess of 72. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (March 9, 2012) is 4429 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-V3' is mentioned on line 164, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'OTN-V3' is mentioned on line 170, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'G709-v1' is mentioned on line 196, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'RFC4606' is mentioned on line 414, but not defined == Unused Reference: 'OTN-INFO' is defined on line 1056, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'OTN-LMP' is defined on line 1065, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'G709-V2' is defined on line 1081, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'G798-V2' is defined on line 1084, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'G798-V3' is defined on line 1088, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Outdated reference: A later version (-15) exists of draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g709-framework-05 ** Downref: Normative reference to an Informational draft: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g709-framework (ref. 'OTN-FWK') == Outdated reference: A later version (-13) exists of draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-g709-info-model-01 ** Downref: Normative reference to an Informational draft: draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-g709-info-model (ref. 'OTN-INFO') == Outdated reference: A later version (-13) exists of draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ospf-g709v3-00 -- No information found for draft-zhang-ccamp-gmpls-g - is the name correct? -- Possible downref: Normative reference to a draft: ref. 'OTN-LMP' -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'G709-V3' -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'G709-V3-A2' Summary: 3 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 13 warnings (==), 5 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 Network Working Group Fatai Zhang, Ed. 2 Internet Draft Huawei 3 Category: Standards Track Guoying Zhang 4 CATR 5 Sergio Belotti 6 Alcatel-Lucent 7 D. Ceccarelli 8 Ericsson 9 Khuzema Pithewan 10 Infinera 11 Expires: September 9, 2012 March 9, 2012 13 Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling 14 Extensions for the evolving G.709 Optical Transport Networks Control 16 draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-02.txt 18 Status of this Memo 20 This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with 21 the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 23 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 24 Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that 25 other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- 26 Drafts. 28 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 29 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 30 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 31 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 33 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at 34 http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. 36 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at 37 http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. 39 This Internet-Draft will expire on September 9, 2012. 41 Abstract 43 Recent progress in ITU-T Recommendation G.709 standardization has 44 introduced new ODU containers (ODU0, ODU4, ODU2e and ODUflex) and 45 enhanced Optical Transport Networking (OTN) flexibility. Several 46 recent documents have proposed ways to modify GMPLS signaling 47 protocols to support these new OTN features. 49 It is important that a single solution is developed for use in GMPLS 50 signaling and routing protocols. This solution must support ODUk 51 multiplexing capabilities, address all of the new features, be 52 acceptable to all equipment vendors, and be extensible considering 53 continued OTN evolution. 55 This document describes the extensions to the Generalized Multi- 56 Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) signaling to control the evolving 57 Optical Transport Networks (OTN) addressing ODUk multiplexing and new 58 features including ODU0, ODU4, ODU2e and ODUflex. 60 Conventions used in this document 62 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 63 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 64 document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. 66 Table of Contents 68 1. Introduction .................................................. 3 69 2. Terminology ................................................... 4 70 3. GMPLS Extensions for the Evolving G.709 - Overview ............ 4 71 4. Generalized Label Request ..................................... 5 72 5. Extensions for Traffic Parameters for the Evolving G.709 ...... 5 73 5.1. Usage of ODUflex(CBR) Traffic Parameters ................. 7 74 5.2. Usage of ODUflex(GFP) Traffic Parameters ................. 9 75 6. Generalized Label ............................................. 9 76 6.1. New definition of ODU Generalized Label ................. 10 77 6.2. Examples ................................................ 12 78 6.3. Label Distribution Procedure ............................ 14 79 6.3.1. Notification on Label Error ........................ 15 80 6.4. Supporting Virtual Concatenation and Multiplication ..... 15 81 7. Supporting Multiplexing Hierarchy ............................ 16 82 7.1. ADAPTATION Object ....................................... 17 83 7.2. ODU FA-LSP Creation ..................................... 19 84 8. Supporting Hitless Adjustment of ODUflex (GFP) ............... 20 85 9. Control Plane Backward Compatibility Considerations........... 21 86 10. Security Considerations ..................................... 22 87 11. IANA Considerations.......................................... 22 88 12. References .................................................. 23 89 12.1. Normative References ................................... 23 90 12.2. Informative References ................................. 24 91 13. Contributors ................................................ 25 92 14. Authors' Addresses .......................................... 25 93 15. Acknowledgment .............................................. 28 95 1. Introduction 97 Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) [RFC3945] extends 98 MPLS to include Layer-2 Switching (L2SC), Time-Division Multiplex 99 (e.g., SONET/SDH, PDH, and ODU), Wavelength (OCh, Lambdas) Switching, 100 and Spatial Switching (e.g., incoming port or fiber to outgoing port 101 or fiber). [RFC3471] presents a functional description of the 102 extensions to Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) signaling 103 required to support Generalized MPLS. RSVP-TE-specific formats and 104 mechanisms and technology specific details are defined in [RFC3473]. 106 With the evolution and deployment of G.709 technology, it is 107 necessary that appropriate enhanced control technology support be 108 provided for G.709. [RFC4328] describes the control technology 109 details that are specific to foundation G.709 Optical Transport 110 Networks (OTN), as specified in the ITU-T Recommendation G.709 [G709- 111 V1], for ODUk deployments without multiplexing. 113 In addition to increasing need to support ODUk multiplexing, the 114 evolution of OTN has introduced additional containers and new 115 flexibility. For example, ODU0, ODU2e, ODU4 containers and ODUflex 116 are developed in [G709-V3]. 118 In addition, the following issues require consideration: 120 - Support for Hitless Adjustment of ODUflex (GFP) (HAO), which is 121 defined in [G.7044]. 123 - Support for Tributary Port Number. The Tributary Port Number 124 has to be negotiated on each link for flexible assignment of 125 tributary ports to tributary slots in case of LO-ODU over HO- 126 ODU (e.g., ODU2 into ODU3). 128 Therefore, it is clear that [RFC4328] has to be updated or superceded 129 in order to support ODUk multiplexing, as well as other ODU 130 enhancements introduced by evolution of OTN standards. 132 This document updates [RFC4328] extending the G.709 ODUk traffic 133 parameters and also presents a new OTN label format which is very 134 flexible and scalable. 136 2. Terminology 138 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 139 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 140 document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. 142 3. GMPLS Extensions for the Evolving G.709 - Overview 144 New features for the evolving OTN, for example, new ODU0, ODU2e, ODU4 145 and ODUflex containers are specified in [G709-V3]. The corresponding 146 new signal types are summarized below: 148 - Optical Channel Transport Unit (OTUk): 149 . OTU4 151 - Optical Channel Data Unit (ODUk): 152 . ODU0 153 . ODU2e 154 . ODU4 155 . ODUflex 157 A new Tributary Slot (TS) granularity (i.e., 1.25 Gbps) is also 158 described in [G709-V3]. Thus, there are now two TS granularities for 159 the foundation OTN ODU1, ODU2 and ODU3 containers. The TS granularity 160 at 2.5 Gbps is used on legacy interfaces while the new 1.25 Gbps is 161 used on the new interfaces. 163 In addition to the support of ODUk mapping into OTUk (k = 1, 2, 3, 4), 164 the evolving OTN [G.709-V3] encompasses the multiplexing of ODUj (j = 165 0, 1, 2, 2e, 3, flex) into an ODUk (k > j), as described in Section 166 3.1.2 of [OTN-FWK]. 168 Virtual Concatenation (VCAT) of OPUk (OPUk-Xv, k = 1/2/3, X = 1...256) 169 is also supported by [OTN-V3]. Note that VCAT of OPU0 / OPU2e / OPU4 170 / OPUflex is not supported per [OTN-V3]. 172 [RFC4328] describes GMPLS signaling extensions to support the control 173 for G.709 Optical Transport Networks (OTN) [G709-V1]. However, 174 [RFC4328] needs to be updated because it does not provide the means 175 to signal all the new signal types and related mapping and 176 multiplexing functionalities. Moreover, it supports only the 177 deprecated auto-MSI mode which assumes that the Tributary Port Number 178 is automatically assigned in the transmit direction and not checked 179 in the receive direction. 181 This document extends the G.709 traffic parameters described in 182 [RFC4328] and presents a new flexible and scalable OTN label format. 184 Additionally, procedures about Tributary Port Number assignment 185 through control plane are also provided in this document. 187 4. Generalized Label Request 189 The Generalized Label Request, as described in [RFC3471], carries the 190 LSP Encoding Type, the Switching Type and the Generalized Protocol 191 Identifier (G-PID). 193 [RFC4328] extends the Generalized Label Request, introducing two new 194 code-points for the LSP Encoding Type (i.e., G.709 ODUk (Digital Path) 195 and G.709 Optical Channel) and adding a list of G-PID values in order 196 to accommodate [G709-v1]. 198 This document follows these extensions and a new Switching Type is 199 introduced to indicate the ODUk switching capability [G709-V3] in 200 order to support backward compatibility with [RFC4328], as described 201 in [OTN-FWK]. The new Switching Type (101, TBA by IANA) is defined in 202 [OTN-OSPF]. 204 5. Extensions for Traffic Parameters for the Evolving G.709 206 The traffic parameters for G.709 are defined as follows: 208 0 1 2 3 209 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 1 210 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 211 | Signal Type | Reserved | NMC/ Tolerance | 212 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 213 | NVC | Multiplier (MT) | 214 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 215 | Bit_Rate | 216 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 218 The Signal Type needs to be extended in order to cover the new Signal 219 Type introduced by the evolving OTN. The new Signal Type values are 220 extended as follows: 222 Value Type 223 ----- ---- 224 0 Not significant 225 1 ODU1 (i.e., 2.5 Gbps) 226 2 ODU2 (i.e., 10 Gbps) 227 3 ODU3 (i.e., 40 Gbps) 228 4 ODU4 (i.e., 100 Gbps) 229 5 Reserved (for future use) 230 6 OCh at 2.5 Gbps 231 7 OCh at 10 Gbps 232 8 OCh at 40 Gbps 233 9 OCh at 100 Gbps 234 10 ODU0 (i.e., 1.25 Gbps) 235 11 ODU2e (i.e., 10Gbps for FC1200 and GE LAN) 236 12~19 Reserved (for future use) 237 20 ODUflex(CBR) (i.e., 1.25*N Gbps) 238 21 ODUflex(GFP-F), resizable (i.e., 1.25*N Gbps) 239 22 ODUflex(GFP-F), non resizable (i.e., 1.25*N Gbps) 240 23~255 Reserved (for future use) 242 NMC/Tolerance: 244 This field is redefined from the original definition in [RFC4328]. 245 NMC field defined in [RFC4328] cannot be fixed value for an end-to- 246 end circuit involving dissimilar OTN link types. For example, ODU2e 247 requires 9 TS on ODU3 and 8 TS on ODU4. Usage of NMC field is 248 deprecated and should be used only with [RFC4328] generalized label 249 format for backwards compatibility reasons. For the new generalized 250 label format as defined in this document this field is interpreted as 251 Tolerance. 253 In case of ODUflex(CBR), the Bit_Rate and Tolerance fields MUST be 254 used together to represent the actual bandwidth of ODUflex, where: 256 - The Bit_Rate field indicates the nominal bit rate of ODUflex(CBR) 257 expressed in bytes per second, encoded as a 32-bit IEEE single- 258 precision floating-point number (referring to [RFC4506] and 259 [IEEE]). The value contained in the Bit Rate field has to keep 260 into account both 239/238 factor and the Transcoding factor. 262 - The Tolerance field indicates the bit rate tolerance (part per 263 million, ppm) of the ODUflex(CBR) encoded as an unsigned integer, 264 which is bounded in 0~100ppm. 266 For example, for an ODUflex(CBR) service with Bit_Rate = 2.5Gbps and 267 Tolerance = 100ppm, the actual bandwidth of the ODUflex is: 269 2.5Gbps * (1 +/- 100ppm) 271 In case of ODUflex(GFP), the Bit_Rate field is used to indicate the 272 nominal bit rate of the ODUflex(GFP), which implies the number of 273 tributary slots requested for the ODUflex(GFP). Since the tolerance 274 of ODUflex(GFP) makes no sense on tributary slot resource reservation, 275 the Tolerance field for ODUflex(GFP) is not necessary and MUST be 276 filled with 0. 278 In case of other ODUk signal types, the Bit_Rate and Tolerance fields 279 are not necessary and MUST be set to 0. 281 The usage of the NVC and Multiplier (MT) fields are the same as 282 [RFC4328]. 284 5.1. Usage of ODUflex(CBR) Traffic Parameters 286 In case of ODUflex(CBR), the information of Bit_Rate and Tolerance in 287 the ODUflex traffic parameters MUST be used to determine the total 288 number of tributary slots N in the HO ODUk link to be reserved. Here: 290 N = Ceiling of 292 ODUflex(CBR) nominal bit rate * (1 + ODUflex(CBR) bit rate tolerance) 293 --------------------------------------------------------------------- 294 ODTUk.ts nominal bit rate * (1 - HO OPUk bit rate tolerance) 296 In this formula, the ODUflex(CBR) nominal bit rate is the bit rate of 297 the ODUflex(CBR) on the line side, i.e., the client signal bit rate 298 after applying the 239/238 factor (according to clause 7.3 table 7.2 299 of [G709-V3]) and the transcoding factor T (if needed) on the CBR 300 client. According to clauses 17.7.3, 17.7.4 and 17.7.5 of [G709-V3]: 302 ODUflex(CBR) nominal bit rate = CBR client bit rate * (239/238) / T 304 The ODTUk.ts nominal bit rate is the nominal bit rate of the 305 tributary slot of ODUk, as shown in Table 1 (referring to [G709-V3]). 307 Table 1 - Actual TS bit rate of ODUk (in Gbps) 309 ODUk.ts Minimum Nominal Maximum 310 ---------------------------------------------------------- 311 ODU2.ts 1.249 384 632 1.249 409 620 1.249 434 608 312 ODU3.ts 1.254 678 635 1.254 703 729 1.254 728 823 313 ODU4.ts 1.301 683 217 1.301 709 251 1.301 735 285 315 Note that: 317 Minimum bit rate of ODUTk.ts = 318 ODTUk.ts nominal bit rate * (1 - HO OPUk bit rate tolerance) 320 Maximum bit rate of ODTUk.ts = 321 ODTUk.ts nominal bit rate * (1 + HO OPUk bit rate tolerance) 323 Where: HO OPUk bit rate tolerance = 20ppm 325 Therefore, a node receiving a PATH message containing ODUflex(CBR) 326 nominal bit rate and tolerance can allocate precise number of 327 tributary slots and set up the cross-connection for the ODUflex 328 service. 330 Note that for different ODUk, the bit rates of the tributary slots 331 are different, and so the total number of tributary slots to be 332 reserved for the ODUflex(CBR) may not be the same on different HO 333 ODUk links. 335 An example is given below to illustrate the usage of ODUflex(CBR) 336 traffic parameters. 338 As shown in Figure 1, assume there is an ODUflex(CBR) service 339 requesting a bandwidth of (2.5Gbps, +/-100ppm) from node A to node C. 340 In other words, the ODUflex traffic parameters indicate that Signal 341 Type is 20 (ODUflex(CBR)), Bit_Rate is 2.5Gbps and Tolerance is 342 100ppm. 344 +-----+ +---------+ +-----+ 345 | +-------------+ +-----+ +-------------+ | 346 | +=============+\| ODU |/+=============+ | 347 | +=============+/| flex+-+=============+ | 348 | +-------------+ | |\+=============+ | 349 | +-------------+ +-----+ +-------------+ | 350 | | | | | | 351 | | ....... | | ....... | | 352 | A +-------------+ B +-------------+ C | 353 +-----+ HO ODU4 +---------+ HO ODU2 +-----+ 355 =========: TS occupied by ODUflex 356 ---------: free TS 358 Figure 1 - Example of ODUflex(CBR) Traffic Parameters 360 - On the HO ODU4 link between node A and B: 362 The maximum bit rate of the ODUflex(CBR) equals 2.5Gbps * (1 + 363 100ppm), and the minimum bit rate of the tributary slot of ODU4 364 equals 1.301 683 217Gbps, so the total number of tributary slots 365 N1 to be reserved on this link is: 367 N1 = ceiling (2.5Gbps * (1 + 100ppm) / 1.301 683 217Gbps) = 2 369 - On the HO ODU2 link between node B and C: 371 The maximum bit rate of the ODUflex equals 2.5Gbps * (1 + 100ppm), 372 and the minimum bit rate of the tributary slot of ODU2 equals 373 1.249 384 632Gbps, so the total number of tributary slots N2 to 374 be reserved on this link is: 376 N2 = ceiling (2.5Gbps * (1 + 100ppm) / 1.249 384 632Gbps) = 3 378 5.2. Usage of ODUflex(GFP) Traffic Parameters 380 [G709-V3-A2] recommends that the ODUflex(GFP) will fill an integral 381 number of tributary slots of the smallest HO ODUk path over which the 382 ODUflex(GFP) may be carried, as shown in Table 2. 384 Table 2 - Recommended ODUflex(GFP) bit rates and tolerance 386 ODU type | Nominal bit-rate | Tolerance 387 --------------------------------+------------------+----------- 388 ODUflex(GFP) of n TS, 1<=n<=8 | n * ODU2.ts | +/-100 ppm 389 ODUflex(GFP) of n TS, 9<=n<=32 | n * ODU3.ts | +/-100 ppm 390 ODUflex(GFP) of n TS, 33<=n<=80 | n * ODU4.ts | +/-100 ppm 392 According to this table, the Bit_Rate field for ODUflex(GFP) MUST 393 equal to one of the 80 values listed below: 395 1 * ODU2.ts; 2 * ODU2.ts; ...; 8 * ODU2.ts; 396 9 * ODU3.ts; 10 * ODU3.ts, ...; 32 * ODU3.ts; 397 33 * ODU4.ts; 34 * ODU4.ts; ...; 80 * ODU4.ts. 399 In this way, the number of required tributary slots for the 400 ODUflex(GFP) (i.e., the value of "n" in Table 2) can be deduced from 401 the Bit_Rate field. 403 6. Generalized Label 405 [RFC3471] has defined the Generalized Label which extends the 406 traditional label by allowing the representation of not only labels 407 which are sent in-band with associated data packets, but also labels 408 which identify time-slots, wavelengths, or space division multiplexed 409 positions. The format of the corresponding RSVP-TE Generalized Label 410 object is defined in the Section 2.3 of [RFC3473]. 412 However, for different technologies, we usually need use specific 413 label rather than the Generalized Label. For example, the label 414 format described in [RFC4606] could be used for SDH/SONET, the label 415 format in [RFC4328] for G.709. 417 6.1. New definition of ODU Generalized Label 419 In order to be compatible with new types of ODU signal and new types 420 of tributary slot, the following new ODU label format MUST be used: 422 0 1 2 3 423 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 1 424 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 425 | TPN | Reserved | Length | 426 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 427 ~ Bit Map ......... ~ 428 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 430 The ODU Generalized Label is used to indicate how the LO ODUj signal 431 is multiplexed into the HO ODUk link. Note that the LO OUDj signal 432 type is indicated by traffic parameters, while the type of HO ODUk 433 link can be figured out locally according to the identifier of the 434 selected interface carried in the IF_ID RSVP_HOP Object. 436 TPN (12 bits): indicates the Tributary Port Number (TPN) for the 437 assigned Tributary Slot(s). 439 - In case of LO ODUj multiplexed into HO ODU1/ODU2/ODU3, only the 440 lower 6 bits of TPN field are significant and the other bits of 441 TPN MUST be set to 0. 443 - In case of LO ODUj multiplexed into HO ODU4, only the lower 7 444 bits of TPN field are significant and the other bits of TPN 445 MUST be set to 0. 447 - In case of ODUj mapped into OTUk (j=k), the TPN is not needed 448 and this field MUST be set to 0. 450 As per [G709-V3], The TPN is used to allow for correct demultiplexing 451 in the data plane. When an LO ODUj is multiplexed into HO ODUk 452 occupying one or more TSs, a new TPN value is configured at the two 453 ends of the HO ODUk link and is put into the related MSI byte(s) in 454 the OPUk overhead at the (traffic) ingress end of the link, so that 455 the other end of the link can learn which TS(s) is/are used by the LO 456 ODUj in the data plane. 458 According to [G709-V3], the TPN field MUST be set as according to the 459 following tables: 461 Table 3 - TPN Assignment Rules (2.5Gbps TS granularity) 462 +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 463 |HO ODUk|LO ODUj|TPN | TPN Assignment Rules | 464 +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 465 | ODU2 | ODU1 |1~4 |Fixed, = TS# occupied by ODU1 | 466 +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 467 | | ODU1 |1~16|Fixed, = TS# occupied by ODU1 | 468 | ODU3 +-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 469 | | ODU2 |1~4 |Flexible, != other existing LO ODU2s' TPNs | 470 +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 472 Table 4 - TPN Assignment Rules (1.25Gbps TS granularity) 473 +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 474 |HO ODUk|LO ODUj|TPN | TPN Assignment Rules | 475 +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 476 | ODU1 | ODU0 |1~2 |Fixed, = TS# occupied by ODU0 | 477 +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 478 | | ODU1 |1~4 |Flexible, != other existing LO ODU1s' TPNs | 479 | ODU2 +-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 480 | |ODU0 & |1~8 |Flexible, != other existing LO ODU0s and | 481 | |ODUflex| |ODUflexes' TPNs | 482 +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 483 | | ODU1 |1~16|Flexible, != other existing LO ODU1s' TPNs | 484 | +-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 485 | | ODU2 |1~4 |Flexible, != other existing LO ODU2s' TPNs | 486 | ODU3 +-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 487 | |ODU0 & | |Flexible, != other existing LO ODU0s and | 488 | |ODU2e &|1~32|ODU2es and ODUflexes' TPNs | 489 | |ODUflex| | | 490 +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 491 | ODU4 |Any ODU|1~80|Flexible, != ANY other existing LO ODUs' TPNs | 492 +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 494 Note that in the case of "Flexible", the value of TPN is not 495 corresponding to the TS number as per [G709-V3]. 497 Length (12 bits): indicates the number of bit of the Bit Map field, 498 i.e., the total number of TS in the HO ODUk link. 500 In case of an ODUk mapped into OTUk, there is no need to indicate 501 which tributary slots will be used, so the length field MUST be set 502 to 0. 504 Bit Map (variable): indicates which tributary slots in HO ODUk that 505 the LO ODUj will be multiplexed into. The sequence of the Bit Map is 506 consistent with the sequence of the tributary slots in HO ODUk. Each 507 bit in the bit map represents the corresponding tributary slot in HO 508 ODUk with a value of 1 or 0 indicating whether the tributary slot 509 will be used by LO ODUj or not. 511 Padded bits are added behind the Bit Map to make the whole label a 512 multiple of four bytes if necessary. Padded bit MUST be set to 0 and 513 MUST be ignored. 515 Note that the Length field in the label format can also be used to 516 indicate the TS type of the HO ODUk (i.e., TS granularity at 1.25Gbps 517 or 2.5Gbps) since the HO ODUk type can be known from IF_ID RSVP_HOP 518 Object. In some cases when there is no LMP (Link Management Protocol) 519 or routing to make the two end points of the link to know the TSG, 520 the TSG information used by another end can be deduced from the label 521 format. For example, for HO ODU2 link, the value of the length filed 522 will be 4 or 8, which indicates the TS granularity is 2.5Gbps or 523 1.25Gbps, respectively. 525 6.2. Examples 527 The following examples are given in order to illustrate the label 528 format described in the previous sections of this document. 530 (1) ODUk into OTUk mapping: 532 In such conditions, the downstream node along an LSP returns a label 533 indicating that the ODUk (k=1, 2, 3, 4) is directly mapped into the 534 corresponding OTUk. The following example label indicates an ODU1 535 mapped into OTU1. 537 0 1 2 3 538 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 1 539 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 540 | TPN = 0 | Reserved | Length = 0 | 541 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 543 (2) ODUj into ODUk multiplexing: 545 In such conditions, this label indicates that an ODUj is multiplexed 546 into several tributary slots of OPUk and then mapped into OTUk. Some 547 instances are shown as follow: 549 - ODU0 into ODU2 Multiplexing: 551 0 1 2 3 552 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 1 553 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 554 | TPN = 2 | Reserved | Length = 8 | 555 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 556 |0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0| Padded Bits (0) | 557 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 559 This above label indicates an ODU0 multiplexed into the second 560 tributary slot of ODU2, wherein there are 8 TS in ODU2 (i.e., the 561 type of the tributary slot is 1.25Gbps), and the TPN value is 2. 563 - ODU1 into ODU2 Multiplexing with 1.25Gbps TS granularity: 565 0 1 2 3 566 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 1 567 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 568 | TPN = 1 | Reserved | Length = 8 | 569 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 570 |0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0| Padded Bits (0) | 571 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 573 This above label indicates an ODU1 multiplexed into the 2nd and the 574 4th tributary slot of ODU2, wherein there are 8 TS in ODU2 (i.e., the 575 type of the tributary slot is 1.25Gbps), and the TPN value is 1. 577 - ODU2 into ODU3 Multiplexing with 2.5Gbps TS granularity: 579 0 1 2 3 580 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 1 581 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 582 | TPN = 1 | Reserved | Length = 16 | 583 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 584 |0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0| Padded Bits (0) | 585 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 587 This above label indicates an ODU2 multiplexed into the 2nd, 3rd, 5th 588 and 7th tributary slot of ODU3, wherein there are 16 TS in ODU3 (i.e., 589 the type of the tributary slot is 2.5Gbps), and the TPN value is 1. 591 6.3. Label Distribution Procedure 593 This document does not change the existing label distribution 594 procedures [RFC4328] for GMPLS except that the new ODUk label MUST be 595 processed as follows. 597 When a node receives a generalized label request for setting up an 598 ODUj LSP from its upstream neighbor node, the node MUST generate an 599 ODU label according to the signal type of the requested LSP and the 600 free resources (i.e., free tributary slots of ODUk) that will be 601 reserved for the LSP, and send the label to its upstream neighbor 602 node. 604 In case of ODUj to ODUk multiplexing, the node MUST firstly determine 605 the size of the Bit Map field according to the signal type and the 606 tributary slot type of ODUk, and then set the bits to 1 in the Bit 607 Map field corresponding to the reserved tributary slots. The node 608 MUST also assign a valid TPN, which does not collide with other TPN 609 value used by existing LO ODU connections in the selected HO ODU link, 610 and configure the expected multiplex structure identifier (ExMSI) 611 using this TPN. Then, the assigned TPN is filled into the label. 613 In case of ODUk to OTUk mapping, the node only needs to fill the ODUj 614 and the ODUk fields with corresponding values in the label. Other 615 bits are reserved and MUST be set to 0. 617 In order to process a received ODU label, the node MUST firstly learn 618 which ODU signal type is multiplexed or mapped into which ODU signal 619 type accordingly to the traffic parameters and the IF_ID RSVP_HOP 620 Object in the received message. 622 In case of ODUj to ODUk multiplexing, the node MUST retrieve the 623 reserved tributary slots in the ODUk by its downstream neighbor node 624 according to the position of the bits that are set to 1 in the Bit 625 Map field. The node determines the TS type (according to the total TS 626 number of the ODUk, or pre-configured TS type), so that the node, 627 based on the TS type, can multiplex the ODUj into the ODUk. The node 628 MUST also retrieve the TPN value assigned by its downstream neighbor 629 node from the label, and fill the TPN into the related MSI byte(s) in 630 the OPUk overhead in the data plane, so that the downstream neighbor 631 node can check whether the TPN received from the data plane is 632 consistent with the ExMSI and determine whether there is any mismatch 633 defect. 635 In case of ODUk to OTUk mapping, the size of Bit Map field MUST be 0 636 and no additional procedure is needed. 638 Note that the procedures of other label related objects (e.g., 639 Upstream Label, Label Set) are similar to the one described above. 641 Note also that the TPN in the label_ERO MAY not be assigned (i.e., 642 TPN field = 0) if the TPN is requested to be assigned locally. 644 6.3.1. Notification on Label Error 646 When receiving an ODUk label from the neighbor node, the node SHOULD 647 check the integrity of the label. An error message containing an 648 "Unacceptable label value" indication ([RFC3209]) SHOULD be sent if 649 one of the following cases occurs: 651 - Invalid value in the length field. 653 - The selected link only supports 2.5Gbps TS granularity while the 654 Length field in the label along with ODUk signal type indicates 655 the 1.25Gbps TS granularity; 657 - The label includes an invalid TPN value that breaks the TPN 658 assignment rules; 660 - The reserved resources (i.e., the number of "1" in the Bit Map 661 field) do not match with the Traffic Parameters. 663 6.4. Supporting Virtual Concatenation and Multiplication 665 As per [RFC6344], the VCGs can be created using Co-Signaled style or 666 Multiple LSPs style. 668 In case of Co-Signaled style, the explicit ordered list of all labels 669 reflects the order of VCG members, which is similar to [RFC4328]. In 670 case of multiplexed virtually concatenated signals (NVC > 1), the 671 first label indicates the components of the first virtually 672 concatenated signal; the second label indicates the components of the 673 second virtually concatenated signal; and so on. In case of 674 multiplication of multiplexed virtually concatenated signals (MT > 1), 675 the first label indicates the components of the first multiplexed 676 virtually concatenated signal; the second label indicates components 677 of the second multiplexed virtually concatenated signal; and so on. 679 In case of Multiple LSPs style, multiple control plane LSPs are 680 created with a single VCG and the VCAT Call can be used to associate 681 the control plane LSPs. The procedures are similar to section 6 of 682 [RFC6344]. 684 7. Supporting Multiplexing Hierarchy 686 As described in [OTN-FWK], one ODUj connection can be nested into 687 another ODUk (j| 702 | | | | 703 | |<---- ODU2 Connection ----->| | 704 | | | | 705 +----+ +----+ +----+ +----+ +----+ 706 | N1 +---------+ N2 +=========+ N3 +=========+ N4 +---------+ N5 | 707 +----+ +----+ +----+ +----+ +----+ 708 ODU3 link ODU3 link ODU3 link ODU3 link 710 Figure 2 - Example of multiplexing hierarchy 712 The control plane signaling should support the provisioning of 713 hierarchical multiplexing. Two methods are provided below (taking 714 Figure 2 as example): 716 - Using the multi-layer network signaling described in [RFC4206], 717 [RFC6107] and [RFC6001] (including related modifications, if 718 needed). That is, when the signaling message for ODUO connection 719 arrives at N2, a new RSVP session between N2 and N4 is triggered 720 to create the ODU2 connection. This ODU2 connection is treated as 721 a Forwarding Adjacency (FA) after it is created. And then the 722 signaling procedure for the ODU0 connection can be continued using 723 the resource of the ODU2 FA. 725 - The ODU2 FA-LSP is created in advance based on network planning, 726 which is treated as an FA. Then the ODU0 connection can be created 727 using the resource of the ODU2 FA. In this case, the ODU2 FA-LSP 728 and inner ODU0 connections are created separately. 730 For both methods, when creating an FA-LSP(e.g., ODU2 FA-LSP), the 731 penultimate hop needs to choose a correct outgoing interface for the 732 ODU2 connection, so that the destination node can support 733 multiplexing and de-multiplexing LO ODU signal(e.g., ODU0). In order 734 to choose a correct outgoing interface for the penultimate hop of the 735 FA-LSP, multiplexing capability (i.e., what client signal type that 736 can be adapted directly to this FA-LSP) should be carried in the 737 signaling to setup this FA-LSP. In addition, when Auto_Negotiation in 738 the data plane is not enabled, TS granularity may also be needed. 740 7.1. ADAPTATION Object 742 In order to create ODU FA-LSP (i.e., the server layer LSP) for 743 carrying the client LSP, a new object called ADAPTATION Object is 744 introduced, with two TLVs defined in this document: 746 - Type 1 = Server TSG signaling 748 - Type 2 = Hierarchy signaling 750 (1) Type=1 - Server TSG TLV 752 0 1 2 3 753 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 1 754 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 755 | Type = 1 (TSG) | Length | 756 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 757 | TSG | Reserved | 758 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 760 TSG: Tributary Slot Granularity (8bit): Used for signaling the server 761 layer TSG: 763 - 0 - Reserved 764 - 1 - either 1.25Gbps or 2.5Gbps 765 - 2 - 2.5Gbps 766 - 3 - 1.25Gbps 767 - 4~255 - Reserved 769 Where value 1 is used where the fallback procedure at the source end 770 of FA is enabled and the default value of 1.25Gbps can be fallen back 771 to 2.5Gbps. This means that either 1.25 Gpbs or 2.5 Gbps can be used 772 as the server TSG at the sink end of FA. 774 Values 2 and 3 are used to signal a 2.5Gbps or 1.25Gbps interfaces 775 respectively and there is no chance to modify it. 777 Other values are reserved for future extension. 779 (2) Type=2 - Hierarchy TLV 781 0 1 2 3 782 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 1 783 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 784 | Type = 2 (Hierarchy) | Length | 785 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 786 | LSP Enc. Type |Switching Type | Signal Type | Mapping | 787 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 788 | | 789 | ... | 790 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 791 | LSP Enc. Type |Switching Type | Signal Type | Mapping | 792 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 794 A Hierarchy TLV for each branch of the client signal multiplexing 795 supported by the server LSP MUST be used. Inside each TLV a row for 796 each stage of the hierarchy MUST be included. 798 A row for the server stage MUST NOT be included as it is already 799 signaled via the Traffic Parameters. 801 The number of stages is implicitly inferred from the length value. 803 The meaning of the fields is defined as follow: 805 LSP Encoding Type and Switching Type: These fields can assume any 806 value inherited from the Generalized Label Request Object in GMPLS 807 signaling, defined in [RFC3471] and following related RFCs and 808 drafts. 810 Signal Type: In the case of non OTN signal types, this field MUST 811 be set to 0, while in the case of OTN signal types if MUST be 812 filled accordingly to [RFC4328] and this document. 814 Mapping: This field indicates the mapping function used in each 815 client-server relationship of the hierarchy. The values of this 816 field are listed below: 818 Value Type 819 ----- ------ 820 0 Reserved 821 1 AMP 822 2 BMP 823 3 GMP 824 4 GFP-F 825 5 GFP-T 826 6-255 Reserved 828 For example, in order to create ODU3 FA-LSP passing through a set of 829 ODU4 links to perform ODU1->ODU2->ODU3 hierarchy, the Hierarchy TLV 830 can be used to indicate the ODU2 into ODU3 multiplexing and ODU1 into 831 ODU2 multiplexing stages. 833 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 834 | Type = 2 (Hierarchy) | Length = 8 | 835 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 836 | Enc.=12(ODUk) | Switching=101 | Sig. = ODU2 | Mapping = AMP | 837 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 838 | Enc.=12(ODUk) | Switching=101 | Sig. = ODU1 | Mapping = AMP | 839 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 841 7.2. ODU FA-LSP Creation 843 When creating an ODU FA-LSP, the source node (e.g., node N2 in Figure 844 2) can include the ADAPTATION object to specify the desired hierarchy 845 capabilities. 847 On receiving the Path message, the penultimate node on the FA-LSP 848 (e.g., node N3 in Figure 2) MUST select an outgoing link which has 849 the ability to carry the requested ODU FA-LSP which can support the 850 TS granularity and the multiplexing hierarchy listed in the 851 ADAPTATION object at the remote end of the link (Note that such 852 remote capability information can be obtained through LMP, routing 853 protocol or configuration). Then the penultimate node uses the IF_ID 854 RSVP_HOP Object to indicate the selected link for carrying the FA-LSP, 855 as described in [RFC3473]. If no link supporting the specified 856 hierarchy capabilities, a ParhErr message with Error Code = 38 (LSP 857 Hierarchy Issue) and Error Value = y1(new value) MUST be sent back to 858 upstream. 860 Other intermediate nodes along the FA-LSP don't need to process the 861 ADAPTATION object, just forwarding it to the next node in the Path 862 message, without any modification. 864 8. Supporting Hitless Adjustment of ODUflex (GFP) 866 [G.7044] describes the procedure of ODUflex (GFP) hitless resizing 867 using LCR (Link Connection Resize) and BWR (Bandwidth Resize) 868 protocols in OTN data plane. 870 For the control plane, signaling messages are required to initiate 871 the adjustment procedure. Section 2.5 and Section 4.6.4 of [RFC3209] 872 describe how the Share Explicit (SE) style is used in TE network for 873 bandwidth increasing and decreasing, which is still applicable for 874 triggering the ODUflex (GFP) adjustment procedure in data plane. 876 Note that the SE style SHOULD be used at the beginning when creating 877 a resizable ODUflex connection (Signal Type = 21). Otherwise an error 878 with Error Code "Conflicting reservation style" will be generated 879 when performing bandwidth adjustment. 881 If any node along the ODUflex connection doesn't support hitless 882 resizing, a Notify message with Error Code = x2 and Error Value = y1 883 will be sent to the source node. The source node MAY keep the 884 connection and treat it as a non resizable ODUflex connection, or MAY 885 tear it down, depending on the local policy. 887 - Bandwidth increasing 889 In order to increase the bandwidth of an ODUflex (GFP) connection, 890 a Path message with SE style (keeping Tunnel ID unchanged and 891 assigning a new LSP ID) is sent along the path. 893 A downstream node compares the old Traffic Parameters (stored 894 locally) with the new one carried in the Path message, to 895 determine the number of TS to be added. After choosing and 896 reserving new free TS, the downstream node sends back a Resv 897 message carrying both the old and new LABEL Objects in the SE 898 flow descriptor, so that its upstream neighbor can determine 899 which TS are added. And the LCR protocol between each pair of 900 neighbor nodes is triggered. 902 On the source node, the BWR protocol will be triggered by the 903 successful completion of LCR protocols on every hop after Resv 904 message is processed. On success of BWR, the source node SHOULD 905 send a PathTear message to delete the old control state (i.e., 906 the control state of the ODUflex (GFP) before resizing) on the 907 control plane. 909 - Bandwidth decreasing 910 The SE style can also be used for ODUflex bandwidth decreasing. 911 For each pair of neighbor nodes, the sending and receiving Resv 912 message with old and new LABEL Objects will trigger the first 913 step of LCR between them to perform LCR handshake. On the source 914 node, the BWR protocol will be triggered by the successful 915 completion of LCR handshake on every hop after Resv message is 916 processed. On success of BWR, the second step of LCR, i.e., link 917 connection decrease procedure will be started on every hop of the 918 connection. 920 Similarly, after completion of bandwidth decreasing, a ResvErr 921 message SHOULD be sent to tear down the old control state. 923 9. Control Plane Backward Compatibility Considerations 925 Since the [RFC4328] has been deployed in the network for the nodes 926 that support [G709-V1], control plane backward compatibility SHOULD 927 be taken into consideration when the new nodes (supporting [G709-V3] 928 and RSVP-TE extensions defined in this document) and the legacy nodes 929 (supporting [G709-V1] and [RFC4328]) are interworking. 931 The backward compatibility needs to be considered only when 932 controlling ODU1 or ODU2 or ODU3 connection, because legacy nodes can 933 only support these three ODU signal types. In such case, new nodes 934 can fall back to use signaling message defined in [RFC4328] when 935 detecting legacy node on the path. More detailedly: 937 o When receiving Path message using [RFC4328] (i.e., Switching Type 938 = 100), a new node SHOULD follow [RFC4328] to process and reply it. 940 o A source node of an ODU LSP can send Path message using new OTN 941 control message (with new Switching Type = 101, TBA by IANA). If 942 there is legacy node on the LSP, it will fail to process the 943 Generalized Label Request Object because of unknown of the new 944 Switching Type, and reply a PathErr message indicating unknown of 945 this object. The source node MAY re-signal the Path message using 946 [RFC4328], depending on local policies. 948 o Alternatively, if a new node has known that its neighbor only 949 supports [RFC4328] in advance (e.g., through manual configuration 950 or auto discovery mechanism), the new node MAY act as an RSVP 951 agent to translate new RSVP-TE message into old one before sending 952 to its neighbor. 954 No special compatibility consideration needs to be taken if the 955 legacy device has updated its control plane to support this document. 957 10. Security Considerations 959 This document introduces no new security considerations to the 960 existing GMPLS signaling protocols. Referring to [RFC3473], further 961 details of the specific security measures are provided. Additionally, 962 [GMPLS-SEC] provides an overview of security vulnerabilities and 963 protection mechanisms for the GMPLS control plane. 965 11. IANA Considerations 967 - G.709 SENDER_TSPEC and FLOWSPEC objects: 969 The traffic parameters, which are carried in the G.709 970 SENDER_TSPEC and FLOWSPEC objects, do not require any new object 971 class and type based on [RFC4328]: 973 o G.709 SENDER_TSPEC Object: Class = 12, C-Type = 5 [RFC4328] 975 o G.709 FLOWSPEC Object: Class = 9, C-Type = 5 [RFC4328] 977 - Generalized Label Object: 979 The new defined ODU label (Section 6) is a kind of generalized 980 label. Therefore, the Class-Num and C-Type of the ODU label is 981 the same as that of generalized label described in [RFC3473], 982 i.e., Class-Num = 16, C-Type = 2. 984 - ADAPTATION Object: 986 New object with Class-Num = xx, C-Type = xx. See Section 7 for 987 the detail definition. 989 - Error Code = 38 (LSP Hierarchy Issue, referring to [RFC6107]): 991 A new Error Value is added to the Error Code "LSP Hierarchy 992 Issue": 994 Error Value Error case 995 -------------------------------------------------------------- 996 y1 Last hop of an ODU FA-LSP doesn't support 997 specified adaption capabilities (Section 7.2). 999 - Error Code = x2: 1001 New Error Code, indicating errors occurring when controlling a 1002 resizable ODUflex connection. 1004 Error Value Error case 1005 -------------------------------------------------------------- 1006 y1 Do not support hitless assignment of ODUflex (GFP) 1007 (Section 8). 1009 12. References 1011 12.1. Normative References 1013 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 1014 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 1016 [RFC4328] D. Papadimitriou, Ed. "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label 1017 Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Extensions for G.709 Optical 1018 Transport Networks Control", RFC 4328, Jan 2006. 1020 [RFC3209] D. Awduche et al, "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP 1021 Tunnels", RFC3209, December 2001. 1023 [RFC3471] Berger, L., Editor, "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label 1024 Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Functional Description", RFC 1025 3471, January 2003. 1027 [RFC3473] L. Berger, Ed., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching 1028 (GMPLS) Signaling Resource ReserVation Protocol-Traffic 1029 Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions", RFC 3473, January 2003. 1031 [RFC3945] Mannie, E., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching 1032 (GMPLS) Architecture", RFC 3945, October 2004. 1034 [RFC6344] G. Bernstein et al, "Operating Virtual Concatenation (VCAT) 1035 and the Link Capacity Adjustment Scheme (LCAS) with 1036 Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)", 1037 RFC6344, August 2011. 1039 [RFC4206] K. Kompella, Y. Rekhter, Ed., " Label Switched Paths (LSP) 1040 Hierarchy with Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching 1041 (GMPLS) Traffic Engineering (TE)", RFC 4206, October 2005. 1043 [RFC6107] K. Shiomoto, A. Farrel, "Procedures for Dynamically 1044 Signaled Hierarchical Label Switched Paths", RFC6107, 1045 February 2011. 1047 [RFC6001] Dimitri Papadimitriou et al, "Generalized Multi-Protocol 1048 Label Switching (GMPLS) Protocol Extensions for Multi-Layer 1049 and Multi-Region Networks (MLN/MRN)", RFC6001, February 21, 1050 2010. 1052 [OTN-FWK] Fatai Zhang et al, "Framework for GMPLS and PCE Control of 1053 G.709 Optical Transport Networks", draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls- 1054 g709-framework-05.txt, September 9, 2011. 1056 [OTN-INFO] S. Belotti et al, "Information model for G.709 Optical 1057 Transport Networks (OTN)", draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-g709-info- 1058 model-01.txt, September 21, 2011. 1060 [OTN-OSPF] D. Ceccarelli et al, "Traffic Engineering Extensions to 1061 OSPF for Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Control of Evolving G.709 1062 OTN Networks", draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ospf-g709v3-00.txt, 1063 October 13, 2011 1065 [OTN-LMP] Fatai Zhang, Ed., "Link Management Protocol (LMP) 1066 extensions for G.709 Optical Transport Networks", draft- 1067 zhang-ccamp-gmpls-g.709-lmp-discovery-04.txt, April 6, 2011. 1069 [G709-V3] ITU-T, "Interfaces for the Optical Transport Network (OTN) 1070 ", G.709/Y.1331, December 2009. 1072 [G709-V3-A2] ITU-T, "Interfaces for the Optical Transport Network 1073 (OTN) Amendment 2", G.709/y.1331 Amendment 2, April 2011. 1075 12.2. Informative References 1077 [G709-V1] ITU-T, "Interface for the Optical Transport Network (OTN)," 1078 G.709 Recommendation (and Amendment 1), February 2001 1079 (November 2001). 1081 [G709-V2] ITU-T, "Interface for the Optical Transport Network (OTN)," 1082 G.709 Recommendation, March 2003. 1084 [G798-V2] ITU-T, "Characteristics of optical transport network 1085 hierarchy equipment functional blocks", G.798, December 1086 2006. 1088 [G798-V3] ITU-T, "Characteristics of optical transport network 1089 hierarchy equipment functional blocks", G.798v3, consented 1090 June 2010. 1092 [G.7044] ITU-T, "Hitless adjustment of ODUflex", G.7044 (and 1093 Amendment 1), February 2012. 1095 [RFC4506] M. Eisler, Ed., "XDR: External Data Representation 1096 Standard", RFC 4506, May 2006. 1098 [IEEE] "IEEE Standard for Binary Floating-Point Arithmetic", 1099 ANSI/IEEE Standard 754-1985, Institute of Electrical and 1100 Electronics Engineers, August 1985. 1102 [GMPLS-SEC] Fang, L., Ed., "Security Framework for MPLS and GMPLS 1103 Networks", Work in Progress, October 2009. 1105 13. Contributors 1107 Jonathan Sadler, Tellabs 1108 Email: jonathan.sadler@tellabs.com 1110 Kam LAM, Alcatel-Lucent 1111 Email: kam.lam@alcatel-lucent.com 1113 Xiaobing Zi, Huawei Technologies 1114 Email: zixiaobing@huawei.com 1116 Francesco Fondelli, Ericsson 1117 Email: francesco.fondelli@ericsson.com 1119 Lyndon Ong, Ciena 1120 Email: lyong@ciena.com 1122 Biao Lu, infinera 1123 Email: blu@infinera.com 1125 14. Authors' Addresses 1127 Fatai Zhang (editor) 1128 Huawei Technologies 1129 F3-5-B R&D Center, Huawei Base 1130 Bantian, Longgang District 1131 Shenzhen 518129 P.R.China 1132 Phone: +86-755-28972912 1133 Email: zhangfatai@huawei.com 1135 Guoying Zhang 1136 China Academy of Telecommunication Research of MII 1137 11 Yue Tan Nan Jie Beijing, P.R.China 1138 Phone: +86-10-68094272 1139 Email: zhangguoying@mail.ritt.com.cn 1141 Sergio Belotti 1142 Alcatel-Lucent 1143 Optics CTO 1144 Via Trento 30 20059 Vimercate (Milano) Italy 1145 +39 039 6863033 1146 Email: sergio.belotti@alcatel-lucent.it 1148 Daniele Ceccarelli 1149 Ericsson 1150 Via A. Negrone 1/A 1151 Genova - Sestri Ponente 1152 Italy 1153 Email: daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com 1155 Khuzema Pithewan 1156 Infinera Corporation 1157 169, Java Drive 1158 Sunnyvale, CA-94089, USA 1159 Email: kpithewan@infinera.com 1161 Yi Lin 1162 Huawei Technologies 1163 F3-5-B R&D Center, Huawei Base 1164 Bantian, Longgang District 1165 Shenzhen 518129 P.R.China 1166 Phone: +86-755-28972914 1167 Email: yi.lin@huawei.com 1169 Yunbin Xu 1170 China Academy of Telecommunication Research of MII 1171 11 Yue Tan Nan Jie Beijing, P.R.China 1172 Phone: +86-10-68094134 1173 Email: xuyunbin@mail.ritt.com.cn 1175 Pietro Grandi 1176 Alcatel-Lucent 1177 Optics CTO 1178 Via Trento 30 20059 Vimercate (Milano) Italy 1179 +39 039 6864930 1180 Email: pietro_vittorio.grandi@alcatel-lucent.it 1182 Diego Caviglia 1183 Ericsson 1184 Via A. Negrone 1/A 1185 Genova - Sestri Ponente 1186 Italy 1187 Email: diego.caviglia@ericsson.com 1189 Rajan Rao 1190 Infinera Corporation 1191 169, Java Drive 1192 Sunnyvale, CA-94089 1193 USA 1194 Email: rrao@infinera.com 1196 John E Drake 1197 Juniper 1198 Email: jdrake@juniper.net 1200 Igor Bryskin 1201 Adva Optical 1202 EMail: IBryskin@advaoptical.com 1204 15. Acknowledgment 1206 The authors would like to thank Lou Berger and Deborah Brungard for 1207 their useful comments to the document. 1209 Intellectual Property 1211 The IETF Trust takes no position regarding the validity or scope of 1212 any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be 1213 claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology 1214 described in any IETF Document or the extent to which any license 1215 under such rights might or might not be available; nor does it 1216 represent that it has made any independent effort to identify any 1217 such rights. 1219 Copies of Intellectual Property disclosures made to the IETF 1220 Secretariat and any assurances of licenses to be made available, or 1221 the result of an attempt made to obtain a general license or 1222 permission for the use of such proprietary rights by implementers or 1223 users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR 1224 repository at http://www.ietf.org/ipr 1226 The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any 1227 copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary 1228 rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement 1229 any standard or specification contained in an IETF Document. Please 1230 address the information to the IETF at ietf-ipr@ietf.org. 1232 The definitive version of an IETF Document is that published by, or 1233 under the auspices of, the IETF. Versions of IETF Documents that are 1234 published by third parties, including those that are translated into 1235 other languages, should not be considered to be definitive versions 1236 of IETF Documents. The definitive version of these Legal Provisions 1237 is that published by, or under the auspices of, the IETF. Versions of 1238 these Legal Provisions that are published by third parties, including 1239 those that are translated into other languages, should not be 1240 considered to be definitive versions of these Legal Provisions. 1242 For the avoidance of doubt, each Contributor to the IETF Standards 1243 Process licenses each Contribution that he or she makes as part of 1244 the IETF Standards Process to the IETF Trust pursuant to the 1245 provisions of RFC 5378. No language to the contrary, or terms, 1246 conditions or rights that differ from or are inconsistent with the 1247 rights and licenses granted under RFC 5378, shall have any effect and 1248 shall be null and void, whether published or posted by such 1249 Contributor, or included with or in such Contribution. 1251 Disclaimer of Validity 1253 All IETF Documents and the information contained therein are provided 1254 on an "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE 1255 REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE 1256 IETF TRUST AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL 1257 WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY 1258 WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION THEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE 1259 ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS 1260 FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. 1262 Copyright Notice 1264 Copyright (c) 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 1265 document authors. All rights reserved. 1267 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 1268 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 1269 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 1270 publication of this document. Please review these documents 1271 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 1272 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 1273 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 1274 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 1275 described in the Simplified BSD License.