idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-06.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 : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The abstract seems to contain references ([G709-2012]), which it shouldn't. Please replace those with straight textual mentions of the documents in question. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year (Using the creation date from RFC4328, updated by this document, for RFC5378 checks: 2002-04-08) -- The document seems to contain a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, and may have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008. The disclaimer is necessary when there are original authors that you have been unable to contact, or if some do not wish to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust. If you are able to get all authors (current and original) to grant those rights, you can and should remove the disclaimer; otherwise, the disclaimer is needed and you can ignore this comment. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- The document date (January 24, 2013) is 4107 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 132, but not defined -- Looks like a reference, but probably isn't: '32' on line 909 Summary: 1 error (**), 0 flaws (~~), 2 warnings (==), 3 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 Updates: 4328 Guoying Zhang 4 Category: Standards Track CATR 5 Sergio Belotti 6 Alcatel-Lucent 7 D. Ceccarelli 8 Ericsson 9 Khuzema Pithewan 10 Infinera 11 Expires: July 24, 2013 January 24, 2013 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-g709v3-06.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 July 24, 2013. 41 Abstract 43 ITU-T Recommendation G.709 [G709-2012] has introduced new Optical 44 channel Data Unit (ODU) containers (ODU0, ODU4, ODU2e and ODUflex) 45 and enhanced Optical Transport Networking (OTN) flexibility. 47 This document updates RFC4328 to provide the extensions to the 48 Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) signaling to 49 control the evolving OTN addressing ODUk multiplexing and new 50 features including ODU0, ODU4, ODU2e and ODUflex. 52 Conventions used in this document 54 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 55 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 56 document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. 58 Table of Contents 60 1. Introduction .................................................. 3 61 2. Terminology ................................................... 3 62 3. GMPLS Extensions for the Evolving G.709 - Overview ............ 3 63 4. Generalized Label Request ..................................... 4 64 5. Extensions for Traffic Parameters for the Evolving G.709 ...... 6 65 5.1. Usage of ODUflex(CBR) Traffic Parameters ................. 8 66 5.2. Usage of ODUflex(GFP) Traffic Parameters ................ 10 67 5.3. Notification on Errors of OTN-TDM Traffic Parameters .... 10 68 6. Generalized Label ............................................ 11 69 6.1. OTN-TDM Switching Type Generalized Label ................ 11 70 6.2. Procedures .............................................. 13 71 6.2.1. Notification on Label Error ........................ 15 72 6.3. Supporting Virtual Concatenation and Multiplication ..... 16 73 6.4. Examples ................................................ 16 74 7. Supporting Hitless Adjustment of ODUflex (GFP) ............... 18 75 8. Control Plane Backward Compatibility Considerations........... 19 76 9. Security Considerations ...................................... 20 77 10. IANA Considerations.......................................... 20 78 11. References .................................................. 22 79 11.1. Normative References ................................... 22 80 11.2. Informative References ................................. 22 81 12. Contributors ................................................ 23 82 13. Authors' Addresses .......................................... 24 83 14. Acknowledgment .............................................. 26 85 1. Introduction 87 With the evolution and deployment of OTN technology, it is necessary 88 that appropriate enhanced control technology support be provided for 89 [G709-2012]. 91 [OTN-FWK] provides a framework to allow the development of protocol 92 extensions to support GMPLS and Path Computation Element (PCE) 93 control of OTN as specified in [G709-2012]. Based on this framework, 94 [OTN-INFO] evaluates the information needed by the routing and 95 signaling process in OTNs to support GMPLS control of OTN. 97 [RFC4328] describes the control technology details that are specific 98 to the 2001 revision of the G.709 specification. This document 99 updates [RFC4328] to provide Resource ReserVation Protocol-Traffic 100 Engineering (RSVP-TE) extensions to support of control for [G709- 101 2012]. 103 2. Terminology 105 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 106 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 107 document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. 109 3. GMPLS Extensions for the Evolving G.709 - Overview 111 New features for the evolving OTN, for example, new ODU0, ODU2e, ODU4 112 and ODUflex containers are specified in [G709-2012]. The 113 corresponding new signal types are summarized below: 115 - Optical Channel Transport Unit (OTUk): 116 . OTU4 118 - Optical Channel Data Unit (ODUk): 119 . ODU0 120 . ODU2e 121 . ODU4 122 . ODUflex 124 A new Tributary Slot Granularity (TS Granularity, TSG) (i.e., 1.25 125 Gbps) is also described in [G709-2012]. Thus, there are now two TS 126 granularities for the foundation OTN ODU1, ODU2 and ODU3 containers. 128 The TS granularity at 2.5 Gbps is used on legacy interfaces while the 129 new 1.25 Gbps is used on the new interfaces. 131 In addition to the support of ODUk mapping into OTUk (k = 1, 2, 3, 132 4), the evolving OTN [G.709-V3] encompasses the multiplexing of ODUj 133 (j = 0, 1, 2, 2e, 3, flex) into an ODUk (k > j), as described in 134 Section 3.1.2 of [OTN-FWK]. 136 Virtual Concatenation (VCAT) of Optical channel Payload Unit-k (OPUk) 137 (OPUk-Xv, k = 1/2/3, X = 1...256) is also supported by [G709-2012]. 138 Note that VCAT of OPU0 / OPU2e / OPU4 / OPUflex is not supported per 139 [G709-2012]. 141 [RFC4328] describes GMPLS signaling extensions to support the control 142 for the 2001 revision of the G.709 specification. However, [RFC4328] 143 needs to be updated because it does not provide the means to signal 144 all the new signal types and related mapping and multiplexing 145 functionalities. Moreover, it supports only the deprecated auto- 146 Multiframe Structure Identifier (MSI) mode which assumes that the 147 Tributary Port Number (TPN) is automatically assigned in the transmit 148 direction and not checked in the receive direction. 150 This document extends the G.709 Traffic Parameters described in 151 [RFC4328] and presents a new flexible and scalable OTN label format. 152 Additionally, procedures about Tributary Port Number assignment 153 through control plane are also provided in this document. 155 4. Generalized Label Request 157 The Generalized Label Request, as described in [RFC3471], carries the 158 Label Switched Path (LSP) Encoding Type, the Switching Type and the 159 Generalized Protocol Identifier (G-PID). 161 [RFC4328] extends the Generalized Label Request, introducing two new 162 code-points for the LSP Encoding Type (i.e., G.709 ODUk (Digital 163 Path) and G.709 Optical Channel) and adding a list of G-PID values in 164 order to accommodate the 2001 revision of the G.709 specification. 166 This document follows these extensions and a new Switching Type is 167 introduced to indicate the ODUk switching capability [G709-2012] in 168 order to support backward compatibility with [RFC4328], as described 169 in [OTN-FWK]. The new Switching Type (OTN-TDM Switching Type) is 170 defined in [OTN-OSPF]. 172 This document also updates the G-PID values defined in [RFC4328]: 174 Value G-PID Type 175 ----- ---------- 176 47 ODU-2.5G: Transport of Digital Paths (e.g., at 2.5, 10 and 177 40 Gbps) via 2.5Gbps TSG 179 49 CBRa: Asynchronous Constant Bit Rate (CBR) (e.g., 180 mapping of CBR2G5, CBR10G and CBR40G) 182 50 CBRb: Bit synchronous Constant Bit Rate (e.g., mapping 183 of CBR2G5, CBR10G, CBR40G, CBR10G3 and supra- 184 2.488 CBR Gbit/s signal (carried by OPUflex)) 186 32 ATM: Mapping of Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) cell 187 stream (e.g., at 1.25, 2.5, 10 and 40 Gbps) 189 51 BSOT: Non-specific client Bit Stream with Octet Timing 190 (e.g., Mapping of 1.25, 2.5, 10, 40 and 100 Gbps 191 Bit Stream) 193 52 BSNT: Non-specific client Bit Stream without Octet 194 Timing (e.g., Mapping of 1.25, 2.5, 10, 40 and 195 100 Gbps Bit Stream) 197 Note: Values 32, 47, 49 and 50 include mapping of Synchronous Digital 198 Hierarchy (SDH). 200 In the case of ODU multiplexing, the Lower Order ODU (LO ODU) (i.e., 201 the client signal) may be multiplexed into Higher Order ODU (HO ODU) 202 via 1.25G TSG, 2.5G TSG or any one of them (i.e., TSG 203 Auto_Negotiation is enabled). Since the G-PID type "ODUk" defined in 204 [RFC4328] is only used for 2.5Gbps TSG, two new G-PID types are 205 defined as follows: 207 - ODU-1.25G: Transport of Digital Paths at 1.25, 2.5, 10, 40 and 100 208 Gbps via 1.25Gbps TSG 210 - ODU-any: Transport of Digital Paths at 1.25, 2.5, 10, 40 and 100 211 Gbps via 1.25 or 2.5Gbps TSG (i.e., the fallback 212 procedure is enabled and the default value of 1.25Gbps 213 TSG can be fallen back to 2.5Gbps if needed) 215 In addition, some other new G-PID types are defined to support other 216 new client signals described in [G709-2012]: 218 - CBRc: Mapping of constant bit-rate signals with justification 219 into OPUk (k = 0, 1, 2, 3, 4) via Generic Mapping 220 Procedure (GMP) (i.e., mapping of sub-1.238, supra- 221 1.238 to sub-2.488, close-to 9.995, close-to 40.149 222 and close-to 104.134 Gbit/s CBR client signal) 224 - 1000BASE-X: Mapping of a 1000BASE-X signal via timing transparent 225 transcoding into OPU0 227 - FC-1200: Mapping of a FC-1200 signal via timing transparent 228 transcoding into OPU2e 230 The following table summarizes the new G-PID values with respect to 231 the LSP Encoding Type: 233 Value G-PID Type LSP Encoding Type 234 ----- ---------- ----------------- 235 59(TBA) G.709 ODU-1.25G G.709 ODUk 236 60(TBA) G.709 ODU-any G.709 ODUk 237 61(TBA) CBRc G.709 ODUk 238 62(TBA) 1000BASE-X G.709 ODUk (k=0) 239 63(TBA) FC-1200 G.709 ODUk (k=2e) 241 Note: Values 59 and 60 include mapping of SDH. 243 5. Extensions for Traffic Parameters for the Evolving G.709 245 The Traffic Parameters for OTN-TDM capable Switching Type are carried 246 in the OTN-TDM SENDER_TSPEC and FLOWSPEC objects. The objects have 247 the following class and type: 249 - OTN-TDM SENDER_TSPEC Object: Class = 12, C-Type = 7 (TBA) 250 - OTN-TDM FLOWSPEC Object: Class = 9, C-Type = 7 (TBA) 252 The format of Traffic Parameters in these two objects is defined as 253 follows: 255 0 1 2 3 256 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 1 257 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 258 | Signal Type | N | Tolerance | 259 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 260 | NVC | Multiplier (MT) | 261 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 262 | Bit_Rate | 263 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 265 Signal Type: 8 bits 266 As defined in [RFC4328] Section 3.2.1, with the following 267 additional values: 269 Value Type 270 ----- ---- 271 4 ODU4 (i.e., 100 Gbps) 272 9 OCh at 100 Gbps 273 10 ODU0 (i.e., 1.25 Gbps) 274 11 ODU2e (i.e., 10Gbps for FC1200 and GE LAN) 275 12~19 Reserved (for future use) 276 20 ODUflex(CBR) (i.e., 1.25*N Gbps) 277 21 ODUflex(Generic Framing Procedure-Framed (GFP-F)), 278 resizable (i.e., 1.25*N Gbps) 279 22 ODUflex(GFP-F), non resizable (i.e., 1.25*N Gbps) 280 23~255 Reserved (for future use) 282 N: 8 bits 284 In case of ODUflex(GFP) signal types (both resizable and non 285 resizable), this field indicates the number of tributary slots 286 needed for the requested ODUflex(GFP). For other signal types, 287 this field is not necessary and MUST be set to 0. 289 NVC: 16 bits 291 As defined in [RFC4328] Section 3.2.3. 293 Multiplier (MT): 16 bits 295 As defined in [RFC4328] Section 3.2.4. 297 Bit_Rate: 32 bits 299 In case of ODUflex(CBR) signal type, this field indicates the 300 nominal bit rate of ODUflex(CBR) expressed in bytes per second, 301 encoded as a 32-bit IEEE single-precision floating-point number 302 (referring to [RFC4506] and [IEEE]). The value contained in the 303 Bit Rate field has to keep into account both 239/238 factor and 304 the Transcoding factor. For other signal types, this field is not 305 necessary and MUST be set to 0. 307 Tolerance: 16 bits 309 In case of ODUflex(CBR) signal type, this field indicates the bit 310 rate tolerance (part per million, ppm) of the ODUflex(CBR) 311 encoded as an unsigned integer, which MUST be bounded in 312 0~100ppm. For other signal types, this field is not necessary and 313 MUST be set to 0. 315 5.1. Usage of ODUflex(CBR) Traffic Parameters 317 In case of ODUflex(CBR), the information of Bit_Rate and Tolerance in 318 the ODUflex Traffic Parameters MUST be used to determine the actual 319 bandwidth of ODUflex(CBR) (i.e., Bit_Rate * (1 +/- Tolerance)). 320 Therefore the total number of tributary slots N in the HO ODUk link 321 can be reserved correctly. Here: 323 N = Ceiling of 325 ODUflex(CBR) nominal bit rate * (1 + ODUflex(CBR) bit rate tolerance) 326 --------------------------------------------------------------------- 327 ODTUk.ts nominal bit rate * (1 - HO OPUk bit rate tolerance) 329 In this formula, the ODUflex(CBR) nominal bit rate is the bit rate of 330 the ODUflex(CBR) on the line side, i.e., the client signal bit rate 331 after applying the 239/238 factor (according to Clause 7.3, Table 7-2 332 of [G709-2012]) and the transcoding factor T (if needed) on the CBR 333 client. According to clauses 17.7.3, 17.7.4 and 17.7.5 of [G709- 334 2012]: 336 ODUflex(CBR) nominal bit rate = CBR client bit rate * (239/238) / T 338 The ODTUk.ts (Optical channel Data Tributary Unit k with ts tributary 339 slots) nominal bit rate is the nominal bit rate of the tributary slot 340 of ODUk, as shown in Table 1 (referring to Table 7-7 of [G709-2012]). 342 Table 1 - Actual TS bit rate of ODUk (in Kbps) 344 ODUk.ts Minimum Nominal Maximum 345 ----------------------------------------------------------- 346 ODU2.ts 1,249,384.632 1,249,409.620 1,249,434.608 347 ODU3.ts 1,254,678.635 1,254,703.729 1,254,728.823 348 ODU4.ts 1,301,683.217 1,301,709.251 1,301,735.285 350 Note that: 352 Minimum bit rate of ODUTk.ts = 353 ODTUk.ts nominal bit rate * (1 - HO OPUk bit rate tolerance) 355 Maximum bit rate of ODTUk.ts = 356 ODTUk.ts nominal bit rate * (1 + HO OPUk bit rate tolerance) 358 Where: HO OPUk bit rate tolerance = 20ppm 360 Therefore, a node receiving a PATH message containing ODUflex(CBR) 361 nominal bit rate and tolerance can allocate precise number of 362 tributary slots and set up the cross-connection for the ODUflex 363 service. 365 Note that for different ODUk, the bit rates of the tributary slots 366 are different, and so the total number of tributary slots to be 367 reserved for the ODUflex(CBR) MAY not be the same on different HO 368 ODUk links. 370 An example is given below to illustrate the usage of ODUflex(CBR) 371 Traffic Parameters. 373 As shown in Figure 1, assume there is an ODUflex(CBR) service 374 requesting a bandwidth of (2.5Gbps, +/-100ppm) from node A to node C. 375 In other words, the ODUflex Traffic Parameters indicate that Signal 376 Type is 20 (ODUflex(CBR)), Bit_Rate is 2.5Gbps and Tolerance is 377 100ppm. 379 +-----+ +---------+ +-----+ 380 | +-------------+ +-----+ +-------------+ | 381 | +=============+\| ODU |/+=============+ | 382 | +=============+/| flex+-+=============+ | 383 | +-------------+ | |\+=============+ | 384 | +-------------+ +-----+ +-------------+ | 385 | | | | | | 386 | | ....... | | ....... | | 387 | A +-------------+ B +-------------+ C | 388 +-----+ HO ODU4 +---------+ HO ODU2 +-----+ 390 =========: TS occupied by ODUflex 391 ---------: free TS 393 Figure 1 - Example of ODUflex(CBR) Traffic Parameters 395 - On the HO ODU4 link between node A and B: 397 The maximum bit rate of the ODUflex(CBR) equals 2.5Gbps * (1 + 398 100ppm), and the minimum bit rate of the tributary slot of ODU4 399 equals 1,301,683.217 Kbps, so the total number of tributary slots 400 N1 to be reserved on this link is: 402 N1 = ceiling (2.5Gbps * (1 + 100ppm) / 1,301,683.217 Kbps) = 2 404 - On the HO ODU2 link between node B and C: 406 The maximum bit rate of the ODUflex equals 2.5Gbps * (1 + 407 100ppm), and the minimum bit rate of the tributary slot of ODU2 408 equals 1,249,384.632 Kbps, so the total number of tributary slots 409 N2 to be reserved on this link is: 411 N2 = ceiling (2.5Gbps * (1 + 100ppm) / 1,249,384.632 Kbps) = 3 413 5.2. Usage of ODUflex(GFP) Traffic Parameters 415 [G709-2012] recommends that the ODUflex(GFP) will fill an integral 416 number of tributary slots of the smallest HO ODUk path over which the 417 ODUflex(GFP) may be carried, as shown in Table 2. 419 Table 2 - Recommended ODUflex(GFP) bit rates and tolerance 421 ODU type | Nominal bit-rate | Tolerance 422 --------------------------------+------------------+----------- 423 ODUflex(GFP) of N TS, 1<=N<=8 | N * ODU2.ts | +/-100 ppm 424 ODUflex(GFP) of N TS, 9<=N<=32 | N * ODU3.ts | +/-100 ppm 425 ODUflex(GFP) of N TS, 33<=N<=80 | N * ODU4.ts | +/-100 ppm 427 Since each hop on an ODUflex(GFP) LSP requires the same number of 428 tributary slots (i.e., "N" in Table 2), the Traffic Parameters for 429 ODUflex(GFP) just need to carry "N" value to indicate the number of 430 TSs rather than carrying the Bit_Rate and Tolorance. 432 5.3. Notification on Errors of OTN-TDM Traffic Parameters 434 There is no Adspec associated with the OTN-TDM SENDER_TSPEC. Either 435 the Adspec is omitted or an Int-serv Adspec with the Default General 436 Characterization Parameters and Guaranteed Service fragment is used, 437 see [RFC2210]. 439 For a particular sender in a session, the contents of the FLOWSPEC 440 object received in a Resv message SHOULD be identical to the contents 441 of the SENDER_TSPEC object received in the corresponding Path 442 message. If the objects do not match, a ResvErr message with a 443 "Traffic Control Error/Bad Flowspec value" error SHOULD be generated. 445 Intermediate and egress nodes MUST verify that the node itself, and 446 the interfaces on which the LSP will be established, can support the 447 requested Signal Type, NVC, Tolerance and Bit_Rate values. If the 448 requested value(s) cannot be supported, the receiver node MUST 449 generate a PathErr message with a "Traffic Control Error/Service 450 unsupported" indication (see [RFC2205]). 452 In addition, if the MT field is received with a zero value, the node 453 MUST generate a PathErr message with a "Traffic Control Error/Bad 454 Tspec value" indication (see [RFC2205]). 456 Further, if the Signal Type is not ODU1, ODU2 or ODU3, and the NVC 457 field is not 0, the node MUST generate a PathErr message with a 458 "Traffic Control Error/Bad Tspec value" indication (see [RFC2205]). 460 6. Generalized Label 462 This section defines the format of the OTN-TDM Generalized Label. 464 6.1. OTN-TDM Switching Type Generalized Label 466 The following is the Generalized Label format for that MUST be used 467 with the OTN-TDM Switching Type: 469 0 1 2 3 470 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 1 471 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 472 | TPN | Reserved | Length | 473 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 474 ~ Bit Map ...... ~ 475 ~ ...... | Padding Bits ~ 476 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 478 The OTN-TDM Generalized Label is used to indicate how the LO ODUj 479 signal is multiplexed into the HO ODUk link. Note that the LO OUDj 480 signal type is indicated by Traffic Parameters, while the type of HO 481 ODUk link is identified by the selected interface carried in the 482 IF_ID RSVP_HOP Object. 484 TPN (12 bits): indicates the TPN for the assigned Tributary Slot(s). 486 - In case of LO ODUj multiplexed into HO ODU1/ODU2/ODU3, only the 487 lower 6 bits of TPN field are significant and the other bits of 488 TPN MUST be set to 0. 490 - In case of LO ODUj multiplexed into HO ODU4, only the lower 7 491 bits of TPN field are significant and the other bits of TPN 492 MUST be set to 0. 494 - In case of ODUj mapped into OTUk (j=k), the TPN is not needed 495 and this field MUST be set to 0. 497 Per [G709-2012], The TPN is used to allow for correct demultiplexing 498 in the data plane. When an LO ODUj is multiplexed into HO ODUk 499 occupying one or more TSs, a new TPN value is configured at the two 500 ends of the HO ODUk link and is put into the related MSI byte(s) in 501 the OPUk overhead at the (traffic) ingress end of the link, so that 502 the other end of the link can learn which TS(s) is/are used by the LO 503 ODUj in the data plane. 505 According to [G709-2012], the TPN field MUST be set as according to 506 the following tables: 508 Table 3 - TPN Assignment Rules (2.5Gbps TS granularity) 509 +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 510 |HO ODUk|LO ODUj|TPN | TPN Assignment Rules | 511 +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 512 | ODU2 | ODU1 |1~4 |Fixed, = TS# occupied by ODU1 | 513 +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 514 | | ODU1 |1~16|Fixed, = TS# occupied by ODU1 | 515 | ODU3 +-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 516 | | ODU2 |1~4 |Flexible, != other existing LO ODU2s' TPNs | 517 +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 519 Table 4 - TPN Assignment Rules (1.25Gbps TS granularity) 520 +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 521 |HO ODUk|LO ODUj|TPN | TPN Assignment Rules | 522 +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 523 | ODU1 | ODU0 |1~2 |Fixed, = TS# occupied by ODU0 | 524 +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 525 | | ODU1 |1~4 |Flexible, != other existing LO ODU1s' TPNs | 526 | ODU2 +-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 527 | |ODU0 & |1~8 |Flexible, != other existing LO ODU0s and | 528 | |ODUflex| |ODUflexes' TPNs | 529 +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 530 | | ODU1 |1~16|Flexible, != other existing LO ODU1s' TPNs | 531 | +-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 532 | | ODU2 |1~4 |Flexible, != other existing LO ODU2s' TPNs | 533 | ODU3 +-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 534 | |ODU0 & | |Flexible, != other existing LO ODU0s and | 535 | |ODU2e &|1~32|ODU2es and ODUflexes' TPNs | 536 | |ODUflex| | | 537 +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 538 | ODU4 |Any ODU|1~80|Flexible, != ANY other existing LO ODUs' TPNs | 539 +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 541 Note that in the case of "Flexible", the value of TPN MAY not be 542 corresponding to the TS number as per [G709-2012]. 544 Length (12 bits): indicates the number of bits of the Bit Map field, 545 i.e., the total number of TS in the HO ODUk link. The valid values 546 for this field are 0, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32 and 80. 548 In case of an ODUk mapped into OTUk, there is no need to indicate 549 which tributary slots will be used, so the length field MUST be set 550 to 0. 552 Bit Map (variable): indicates which tributary slots in HO ODUk that 553 the LO ODUj will be multiplexed into. The sequence of the Bit Map is 554 consistent with the sequence of the tributary slots in HO ODUk. Each 555 bit in the bit map represents the corresponding tributary slot in HO 556 ODUk with a value of 1 or 0 indicating whether the tributary slot 557 will be used by LO ODUj or not. 559 Padding bits are added after the Bit Map to make the whole label a 560 multiple of four bytes if necessary. Padding bits MUST be set to 0 561 and MUST be ignored. 563 6.2. Procedures 565 The ingress node MUST generate a Path message and specify the OTN-TDM 566 Switching Type and corresponding G-PID in the Generalized Label 567 Request object, which MUST be processed as defined in [RFC3473]. 569 The ingress node of an LSP MAY include label ERO (Explicit Route 570 Object) to indicate the label in each hops along the path. Note that 571 the TPN in the label ERO subobject MAY not be assigned by the ingress 572 node. In this case, the node MUST assign a valid TPN value and then 573 put this value into TPN field of the label object when receiving a 574 Path message. 576 In order to create bidirectional LSP, the ingress node and upstream 577 node MUST generate an Upstream Label on the out outgoing interface to 578 indicate the reserved TSs of ODUk and the assigned TPN value in the 579 upstream direction. This Upstream Label is sent to the downstream 580 node via Path massage for upstream resource reservation. 582 The ingress node or upstream node MAY generate Label Set to indicate 583 which labels on the outgoing interface in the downstream direction 584 are acceptable. The downstream node will restrict its choice of 585 labels, i.e., TS resource and TPN value, to one which is in the Label 586 Set. 588 The ingress node or upstream node MAY also generate Suggested Label 589 to indicate the preference of TS resource and TPN value on the 590 outgoing interface in the downstream direction. The downstream node 591 is not REQUIRED to use the Suggested Label and MAY use another label 592 based on local decision and send it to the upstream node, as 593 described in [RFC3473]. 595 When an upstream node receives a Resv message containing an LABEL 596 object with an OTN-TDM label, it MUST firstly identify which ODU 597 signal type is multiplexed or mapped into which ODU signal type 598 accordingly to the Traffic Parameters and the IF_ID RSVP_HOP Object 599 in the received message. 601 - In case of ODUj to ODUk multiplexing, the node MUST retrieve the 602 reserved tributary slots in the ODUk by its downstream neighbor 603 node according to the position of the bits that are set to 1 in 604 the Bit Map field. The node determines the TS type (according to 605 the total TS number of the ODUk, or pre-configured TS type), so 606 that the node can multiplex the ODUj into the ODUk based on the TS 607 type. The node MUST also retrieve the TPN value assigned by its 608 downstream neighbor node from the label, and fill the TPN into the 609 related MSI byte(s) in the OPUk overhead in the data plane, so 610 that the downstream neighbor node can check whether the TPN 611 received from the data plane is consistent with the ExMSI and 612 determine whether there is any mismatch defect. Note that the 613 Length field in the label format MAY be used to indicate the TS 614 type of the HO ODUk (i.e., TS granularity at 1.25Gbps or 2.5Gbps) 615 since the HO ODUk type can be known from IF_ID RSVP_HOP Object. In 616 some cases when there is no Link Management Protocol (LMP) or 617 routing to make the two end points of the link to know the TSG, 618 the TSG information used by another end can be deduced from the 619 label format. For example, for HO ODU2 link, the value of the 620 length filed will be 4 or 8, which indicates the TS granularity is 621 2.5Gbps or 1.25Gbps, respectively. 623 - In case of ODUk to OTUk mapping, the size of Bit Map field MUST be 624 0 and no additional procedure is needed. 626 When a downstream node or egress node receives a Path message 627 containing Generalized Label Request object for setting up an ODUj 628 LSP from its upstream neighbor node, the node MUST generate an OTN- 629 TDM label according to the signal type of the requested LSP and the 630 free resources (i.e., free tributary slots of ODUk) that will be 631 reserved for the LSP, and send the label to its upstream neighbor 632 node. 634 - In case of ODUj to ODUk multiplexing, the node MUST firstly 635 determine the size of the Bit Map field according to the signal 636 type and the tributary slot type of ODUk, and then set the bits to 637 1 in the Bit Map field corresponding to the reserved tributary 638 slots. The node MUST also assign a valid TPN, which MUST NOT 639 collide with other TPN value used by existing LO ODU connections 640 in the selected HO ODU link, and configure the Expected MSI 641 (ExMSI) using this TPN. Then, the assigned TPN MUST be filled into 642 the label. 644 - In case of ODUk to OTUk mapping, TPN field MUST be set to 0. Bit 645 Map information is not REQUIRED and MUST NOT be included, so 646 Length field MUST be set to 0 as well. 648 6.2.1. Notification on Label Error 650 When an upstream node receives a Resv message containing an LABEL 651 object with an OTN-TDM label, the node MUST verify if the label is 652 acceptable. If the label is not acceptable, the node MUST generate a 653 ResvErr message with a "Routing problem/Unacceptable label value" 654 indication. Per [RFC3473], the generated ResvErr message MAY include 655 an ACCEPTABLE_LABEL_SET object. With the exception of label 656 semantics, downstream node processing a received ResvErr messages and 657 of ACCEPTABLE_LABEL_SET objects is not modified by this document. 659 Similarly, when a downstream node receives a Path message containing 660 an UPSTREAM_LABEL object with an OTN-TDM label, the node MUST verify 661 if the label is acceptable. If the label is not acceptable, the node 662 MUST generate a PathErr message with a "Routing problem/Unacceptable 663 label value" indication. Per [RFC3473], the generated ResvErr message 664 MAY include an ACCEPTABLE_LABEL_SET object. With the exception of 665 label semantics, downstream node processing received PathErr messages 666 and of ACCEPTABLE_LABEL_SET objects is not modified by this document. 668 A received label SHALL be considered unacceptable when one of the 669 following cases occurs: 671 - The received label doesn't conform to local policy; 673 - Invalid value in the length field; 675 - The selected link only supports 2.5Gbps TS granularity while the 676 Length field in the label along with ODUk signal type indicates 677 the 1.25Gbps TS granularity; 679 - The label includes an invalid TPN value that breaks the TPN 680 assignment rules; 682 - The indicated resources (i.e., the number of "1" in the Bit Map 683 field) are inconsistent with the Traffic Parameters. 685 6.3. Supporting Virtual Concatenation and Multiplication 687 Per [RFC6344], the Virtual Concatenation Groups (VCGs) can be created 688 using Co-Signaled style or Multiple LSPs style. 690 In case of Co-Signaled style, the explicit ordered list of all labels 691 MUST reflect the order of VCG members, which is similar to [RFC4328]. 692 In case of multiplexed virtually concatenated signals (NVC > 1), the 693 first label MUST indicate the components of the first virtually 694 concatenated signal; the second label MUST indicate the components of 695 the second virtually concatenated signal; and so on. In case of 696 multiplication of multiplexed virtually concatenated signals (MT > 697 1), the first label MUST indicate the components of the first 698 multiplexed virtually concatenated signal; the second label MUST 699 indicate components of the second multiplexed virtually concatenated 700 signal; and so on. 702 Support for Virtual Concatenation of ODU1, ODU2 and ODU3 signal 703 types, as defined by [RFC6344], is not modified by this document. 704 Virtual Concatenation of other signal types is not supported by 705 [G709-2012]. 707 Multiplier (MT) usage is as defined in [RFC6344] and [RFC4328]. 709 6.4. Examples 711 The following examples are given in order to illustrate the label 712 format described in Section 6.1 of this document. 714 (1) ODUk into OTUk mapping: 716 In such conditions, the downstream node along an LSP returns a label 717 indicating that the ODUk (k=1, 2, 3, 4) is directly mapped into the 718 corresponding OTUk. The following example label indicates an ODU1 719 mapped into OTU1. 721 0 1 2 3 722 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 1 723 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 724 | TPN = 0 | Reserved | Length = 0 | 725 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 727 (2) ODUj into ODUk multiplexing: 729 In such conditions, this label indicates that an ODUj is multiplexed 730 into several tributary slots of OPUk and then mapped into OTUk. Some 731 instances are shown as follow: 733 - ODU0 into ODU2 Multiplexing: 735 0 1 2 3 736 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 1 737 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 738 | TPN = 2 | Reserved | Length = 8 | 739 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 740 |0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0| Padding Bits (0) | 741 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 743 This above label indicates an ODU0 multiplexed into the second 744 tributary slot of ODU2, wherein there are 8 TS in ODU2 (i.e., the 745 type of the tributary slot is 1.25Gbps), and the TPN value is 2. 747 - ODU1 into ODU2 Multiplexing with 1.25Gbps TS granularity: 749 0 1 2 3 750 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 1 751 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 752 | TPN = 1 | Reserved | Length = 8 | 753 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 754 |0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0| Padding Bits (0) | 755 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 757 This above label indicates an ODU1 multiplexed into the 2nd and the 758 4th tributary slot of ODU2, wherein there are 8 TS in ODU2 (i.e., the 759 type of the tributary slot is 1.25Gbps), and the TPN value is 1. 761 - ODU2 into ODU3 Multiplexing with 2.5Gbps TS granularity: 763 0 1 2 3 764 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 1 765 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 766 | TPN = 1 | Reserved | Length = 16 | 767 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 768 |0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0| Padding Bits (0) | 769 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 771 This above label indicates an ODU2 multiplexed into the 2nd, 3rd, 5th 772 and 7th tributary slot of ODU3, wherein there are 16 TS in ODU3 773 (i.e., the type of the tributary slot is 2.5Gbps), and the TPN value 774 is 1. 776 7. Supporting Hitless Adjustment of ODUflex (GFP) 778 [G7044] describes the procedure of ODUflex (GFP) hitless resizing 779 using Link Connection Resize (LCR) and Bandwidth Resize (BWR) 780 protocols in OTN data plane. 782 For the control plane, signaling messages are REQUIRED to initiate 783 the adjustment procedure. Section 2.5 and Section 4.6.4 of [RFC3209] 784 describe how the Shared Explicit (SE) style is used in Traffic 785 Engineering (TE) network for bandwidth increasing and decreasing, 786 which is still applicable for triggering the ODUflex (GFP) adjustment 787 procedure in data plane. 789 Note that the SE style MUST be used at the beginning when creating a 790 resizable ODUflex connection (Signal Type = 21). Otherwise an error 791 with Error Code "Conflicting reservation style" MUST be generated 792 when performing bandwidth adjustment. 794 - Bandwidth increasing 796 For the ingress node, in order to increase the bandwidth of an 797 ODUflex (GFP) connection, a Path message with SE style (keeping 798 Tunnel ID unchanged and assigning a new LSP ID) MUST be sent 799 along the path. 801 The ingress node will trigger the BWR protocol when successful 802 completion of LCR protocols on every hop after Resv message is 803 processed. On success of BWR, the ingress node SHOULD send a 804 PathTear message to delete the old control state (i.e., the 805 control state of the ODUflex (GFP) before resizing) on the 806 control plane. 808 A downstream node receiving Path message with SE style compares 809 the old Traffic Parameters (stored locally) with the new one 810 carried in the Path message, to determine the number of TS to be 811 added. After choosing and reserving new free TS, the downstream 812 node MUST send back a Resv message carrying both the old and new 813 LABEL Objects in the SE flow descriptor. 815 An upstream neighbor receiving Resv message with SE flow 816 descriptor MUST determine which TS are added and trigger the LCR 817 protocol between itself and its downstream neighbor node. 819 - Bandwidth decreasing 821 For the ingress node, a Path message with SE style SHOULD also be 822 sent for ODUflex bandwidth decreasing. 824 The ingress node will trigger the BWR protocol when successful 825 completion of LCR handshake on every hop after Resv message is 826 processed. On success of BWR, the second step of LCR, i.e., link 827 connection decrease procedure will be started on every hop of the 828 connection. After completion of bandwidth decreasing, the ingress 829 node SHOULD send a ResvErr message to tear down the old control 830 state. 832 A downstream node receiving Path message with SE style compares 833 the old Traffic Parameters with the new one carried in the Path 834 message to determine the number of TS to be decreased. After 835 choosing TSs to be decreased, the downstream node MUST send back 836 a Resv message carrying both the old and new LABEL Objects in the 837 SE flow descriptor. 839 An upstream neighbor receiving Resv message with SE flow 840 descriptor MUST determine which TS are decreased and trigger the 841 first step of LCR protocol (i.e., LCR handshake) between itself 842 and its downstream neighbor node. 844 8. Control Plane Backward Compatibility Considerations 846 As described in [OTN-FWK], since the [RFC4328] has been deployed in 847 the network for the nodes that support the 2001 revision of the G.709 848 specification, control plane backward compatibility SHOULD be taken 849 into consideration. More specifically: 851 o Nodes supporting this document SHOULD support [OTN-OSPF]. 853 o Nodes supporting this document MAY support [RFC4328] signaling. 855 o A node supporting both sets of procedures (i.e., [RFC4328] and 856 this document) is not REQUIRED to signal an LSP using both 857 procedures, i.e., to act as a signaling version translator. 859 o Ingress nodes that support both sets of procedures MAY select 860 which set of procedures to follow based on routing information or 861 local policy. 863 o Per [RFC3473], nodes that do not support this document will 864 generate a PathErr message, with a "Routing problem/Switching 865 Type" indication. 867 9. Security Considerations 869 This document introduces no new security considerations to the 870 existing GMPLS signaling protocols. Referring to [RFC3473] and 871 [RFC4328], further details of the specific security measures are 872 provided. Additionally, [RFC5920] provides an overview of security 873 vulnerabilities and protection mechanisms for the GMPLS control 874 plane. 876 10. IANA Considerations 878 Three RSVP C-Types are defined for OTN-TDM Traffic Parameters and 879 OTN-TDM Generalized Label in this document: 880 http://www.iana.org/assignments/rsvp-parameters 882 - OTN-TDM SENDER_TSPEC and FLOWSPEC objects: 884 o OTN-TDM SENDER_TSPEC Object: Class = 12, C-Type = 7 (see 885 Section 5) 887 o OTN-TDM FLOWSPEC Object: Class = 9, C-Type = 7 (see Section 5) 889 - OTN-TDM Generalized Label Object: 891 o OTN-TDM Generalized Label Object: Class = 16, C-Type = 2 (see 892 Section 6.1) 894 IANA maintains the "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching 895 (GMPLS) Signaling Parameters" registry (see 896 http://www.iana.org/assignments/gmpls-sig-parameters). "Generalized 897 PIDs (G-PID)" subregistry is included in this registry, which will be 898 extended and updated by this document as below: 900 - Generalized PID (G-PID): 902 Name: G-PID 904 Format: 16-bit number 906 Values: 908 [0..31, 36..46] defined in [RFC3471] 909 [32] defined in [RFC3471] and updated by Section 4 910 [33..35] defined in [RFC3471] and updated by [RFC4328] 911 [47, 49..52] defined in [RFC4328] and updated by Section 4 913 [48, 53..58] defined in [RFC4328] 914 [59..63] defined in Section 4 of this document 916 Allocation Policy (as defined in [RFC4328]): 918 [0..31743] Assigned by IANA via IETF Standards Track RFC 919 Action. 920 [31744..32767] Assigned temporarily for Experimental Usage 921 [32768..65535] Not assigned. Before any assignments can be 922 made in this range, there MUST be a Standards 923 Track RFC that specifies IANA Considerations 924 that covers the range being assigned. 926 "Signal Type" subregistry to the "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label 927 Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Parameters" will be defined by this 928 document as below: 930 Value Signal Type Reference 931 ----- ----------- --------- 932 0 Not significant [RFC4328] 933 1 ODU1 (i.e., 2.5 Gbps) [RFC4328] 934 2 ODU2 (i.e., 10 Gbps) [RFC4328] 935 3 ODU3 (i.e., 40 Gbps) [RFC4328] 936 4 ODU4 (i.e., 100 Gbps) [this document] 937 5 Reserved (for future use) [RFC4328] 938 6 Och at 2.5 Gbps [RFC4328] 939 7 OCh at 10 Gbps [RFC4328] 940 8 OCh at 40 Gbps [RFC4328] 941 9 OCh at 100 Gbps [this document] 942 10 ODU0 (i.e., 1.25 Gbps) [this document] 943 11 ODU2e (i.e., 10Gbps for FC1200 [this document] 944 and GE LAN) 945 12~19 Reserved (for future use) [this document] 946 20 ODUflex(CBR) (i.e., 1.25*N Gbps) [this document] 947 21 ODUflex(GFP-F), resizable [this document] 948 (i.e., 1.25*N Gbps) 949 22 ODUflex(GFP-F), non resizable [this document] 950 (i.e., 1.25*N Gbps) 951 23~255 Reserved (for future use) [this document] 953 11. References 955 11.1. Normative References 957 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 958 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 960 [RFC2205] Braden, R., Zhang, L., Berson, S., Herzog, S., and S. 961 Jamin, "Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP) -- Version 1 962 Functional Specification", RFC 2205, September 1997. 964 [RFC2210] Wroclawski, J., "The Use of RSVP with IETF Integrated 965 Services", RFC 2210, September 1997. 967 [RFC3209] D. Awduche et al, "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP 968 Tunnels", RFC3209, December 2001. 970 [RFC3471] Berger, L., Editor, "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label 971 Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Functional Description", RFC 972 3471, January 2003. 974 [RFC3473] L. Berger, Ed., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching 975 (GMPLS) Signaling Resource ReserVation Protocol-Traffic 976 Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions", RFC 3473, January 2003. 978 [RFC4328] D. Papadimitriou, Ed. "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label 979 Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Extensions for G.709 Optical 980 Transport Networks Control", RFC 4328, Jan 2006. 982 [RFC6344] G. Bernstein et al, "Operating Virtual Concatenation (VCAT) 983 and the Link Capacity Adjustment Scheme (LCAS) with 984 Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)", 985 RFC6344, August 2011. 987 11.2. Informative References 989 [OTN-FWK] Fatai Zhang et al, "Framework for GMPLS and PCE Control of 990 G.709 Optical Transport Networks", Work in Progress: draft- 991 ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g709-framework, November 2012. 993 [OTN-INFO] S. Belotti et al, "Information model for G.709 Optical 994 Transport Networks (OTN)", Work in Progress: draft-ietf- 995 ccamp-otn-g709-info-model, January 2013. 997 [OTN-OSPF] D. Ceccarelli et al, "Traffic Engineering Extensions to 998 OSPF for Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Control of Evolving G.709 999 OTN Networks", Work in Progress: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls- 1000 ospf-g709v3, January 2013. 1002 [G709-2012] ITU-T, "Interfaces for the Optical Transport Network 1003 (OTN)", G.709/Y.1331 Recommendation, February 2012. 1005 [G7044] ITU-T, "Hitless adjustment of ODUflex", G.7044/Y.1347, 1006 October 2011. 1008 [RFC4506] M. Eisler, Ed., "XDR: External Data Representation 1009 Standard", RFC 4506, May 2006. 1011 [RFC5920] Fang, L., Ed., "Security Framework for MPLS and GMPLS 1012 Networks", RFC5920, July 2010. 1014 [IEEE] "IEEE Standard for Binary Floating-Point Arithmetic", 1015 ANSI/IEEE Standard 754-1985, Institute of Electrical and 1016 Electronics Engineers, August 1985. 1018 12. Contributors 1020 Jonathan Sadler, Tellabs 1021 Email: jonathan.sadler@tellabs.com 1023 Kam LAM, Alcatel-Lucent 1024 Email: kam.lam@alcatel-lucent.com 1026 Xiaobing Zi, Huawei Technologies 1027 Email: zixiaobing@huawei.com 1029 Francesco Fondelli, Ericsson 1030 Email: francesco.fondelli@ericsson.com 1032 Lyndon Ong, Ciena 1033 Email: lyong@ciena.com 1035 Biao Lu, infinera 1036 Email: blu@infinera.com 1038 13. Authors' Addresses 1040 Fatai Zhang (editor) 1041 Huawei Technologies 1042 F3-5-B R&D Center, Huawei Base 1043 Bantian, Longgang District 1044 Shenzhen 518129 P.R.China 1045 Phone: +86-755-28972912 1046 Email: zhangfatai@huawei.com 1048 Guoying Zhang 1049 China Academy of Telecommunication Research of MII 1050 11 Yue Tan Nan Jie Beijing, P.R.China 1051 Phone: +86-10-68094272 1052 Email: zhangguoying@mail.ritt.com.cn 1054 Sergio Belotti 1055 Alcatel-Lucent 1056 Optics CTO 1057 Via Trento 30 20059 Vimercate (Milano) Italy 1058 +39 039 6863033 1059 Email: sergio.belotti@alcatel-lucent.it 1061 Daniele Ceccarelli 1062 Ericsson 1063 Via A. Negrone 1/A 1064 Genova - Sestri Ponente 1065 Italy 1066 Email: daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com 1068 Khuzema Pithewan 1069 Infinera Corporation 1070 169, Java Drive 1071 Sunnyvale, CA-94089, USA 1072 Email: kpithewan@infinera.com 1073 Yi Lin 1074 Huawei Technologies 1075 F3-5-B R&D Center, Huawei Base 1076 Bantian, Longgang District 1077 Shenzhen 518129 P.R.China 1078 Phone: +86-755-28972914 1079 Email: yi.lin@huawei.com 1081 Yunbin Xu 1082 China Academy of Telecommunication Research of MII 1083 11 Yue Tan Nan Jie Beijing, P.R.China 1084 Phone: +86-10-68094134 1085 Email: xuyunbin@mail.ritt.com.cn 1087 Pietro Grandi 1088 Alcatel-Lucent 1089 Optics CTO 1090 Via Trento 30 20059 Vimercate (Milano) Italy 1091 +39 039 6864930 1092 Email: pietro_vittorio.grandi@alcatel-lucent.it 1094 Diego Caviglia 1095 Ericsson 1096 Via A. Negrone 1/A 1097 Genova - Sestri Ponente 1098 Italy 1099 Email: diego.caviglia@ericsson.com 1101 Rajan Rao 1102 Infinera Corporation 1103 169, Java Drive 1104 Sunnyvale, CA-94089 1105 USA 1106 Email: rrao@infinera.com 1107 John E Drake 1108 Juniper 1109 Email: jdrake@juniper.net 1111 Igor Bryskin 1112 Adva Optical 1113 EMail: IBryskin@advaoptical.com 1115 14. Acknowledgment 1117 The authors would like to thank Lou Berger and Deborah Brungard for 1118 their useful comments to the document. 1120 Intellectual Property 1122 The IETF Trust takes no position regarding the validity or scope of 1123 any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be 1124 claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology 1125 described in any IETF Document or the extent to which any license 1126 under such rights might or might not be available; nor does it 1127 represent that it has made any independent effort to identify any 1128 such rights. 1130 Copies of Intellectual Property disclosures made to the IETF 1131 Secretariat and any assurances of licenses to be made available, or 1132 the result of an attempt made to obtain a general license or 1133 permission for the use of such proprietary rights by implementers or 1134 users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR 1135 repository at http://www.ietf.org/ipr 1137 The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any 1138 copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary 1139 rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement 1140 any standard or specification contained in an IETF Document. Please 1141 address the information to the IETF at ietf-ipr@ietf.org. 1143 The definitive version of an IETF Document is that published by, or 1144 under the auspices of, the IETF. Versions of IETF Documents that are 1145 published by third parties, including those that are translated into 1146 other languages, should not be considered to be definitive versions 1147 of IETF Documents. The definitive version of these Legal Provisions 1148 is that published by, or under the auspices of, the IETF. Versions of 1149 these Legal Provisions that are published by third parties, including 1150 those that are translated into other languages, should not be 1151 considered to be definitive versions of these Legal Provisions. 1153 For the avoidance of doubt, each Contributor to the IETF Standards 1154 Process licenses each Contribution that he or she makes as part of 1155 the IETF Standards Process to the IETF Trust pursuant to the 1156 provisions of RFC 5378. No language to the contrary, or terms, 1157 conditions or rights that differ from or are inconsistent with the 1158 rights and licenses granted under RFC 5378, shall have any effect and 1159 shall be null and void, whether published or posted by such 1160 Contributor, or included with or in such Contribution. 1162 Disclaimer of Validity 1164 All IETF Documents and the information contained therein are provided 1165 on an "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE 1166 REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE 1167 IETF TRUST AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL 1168 WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY 1169 WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION THEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE 1170 ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS 1171 FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. 1173 Copyright Notice 1175 Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 1176 document authors. All rights reserved. 1178 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 1179 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 1180 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 1181 publication of this document. Please review these documents 1182 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 1183 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 1184 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 1185 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 1186 described in the Simplified BSD License. 1188 This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF 1189 Contributions published or made publicly available before November 1190 10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this 1191 material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow 1192 modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process. 1193 Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling 1194 the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified 1195 outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may 1196 not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format 1197 it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other 1198 than English.