idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-08.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 lack a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, but may have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008. If you have contacted all the original authors and they are all willing to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust, then this is fine, and you can ignore this comment. If not, you may need to add the pre-RFC5378 disclaimer. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- The document date (April 8, 2013) is 4029 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 905 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: October 8, 2013 April 8, 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-g709v3-08.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 October 8, 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 ................. 7 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 .................................................. 21 79 11.1. Normative References ................................... 21 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 Note that the mapping types for ODUj into OPUk are unambiguously per 244 Table 7-10 of [G709-2012], so it does not need to carry mapping type 245 information in the signaling. 247 5. Extensions for Traffic Parameters for the Evolving G.709 249 The Traffic Parameters for OTN-TDM capable Switching Type are carried 250 in the OTN-TDM SENDER_TSPEC and FLOWSPEC objects. The objects have 251 the following class and type: 253 - OTN-TDM SENDER_TSPEC Object: Class = 12, C-Type = 7 (TBA) 254 - OTN-TDM FLOWSPEC Object: Class = 9, C-Type = 7 (TBA) 256 The format of Traffic Parameters in these two objects is defined as 257 follows: 259 0 1 2 3 260 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 1 261 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 262 | Signal Type | Reserved | 263 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 264 | NVC | Multiplier (MT) | 265 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 266 | Bit_Rate | 267 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 269 Signal Type: 8 bits 271 As defined in [RFC4328] Section 3.2.1, with the following 272 additional values: 274 Value Type 275 ----- ---- 276 4 ODU4 (i.e., 100 Gbps) 277 9 OCh at 100 Gbps 278 10 ODU0 (i.e., 1.25 Gbps) 279 11 ODU2e (i.e., 10Gbps for FC1200 and GE LAN) 280 12~19 Reserved (for future use) 281 20 ODUflex(CBR) (i.e., 1.25*N Gbps) 282 21 ODUflex(Generic Framing Procedure-Framed (GFP-F)), 283 resizable (i.e., 1.25*N Gbps) 284 22 ODUflex(GFP-F), non resizable (i.e., 1.25*N Gbps) 285 23~255 Reserved (for future use) 287 NVC: 16 bits 289 As defined in [RFC4328] Section 3.2.3. This field MUST be set to 290 0 for ODUflex Signal Types. 292 Multiplier (MT): 16 bits 294 As defined in [RFC4328] Section 3.2.4. This field MUST be set to 295 1 for ODUflex Signal Types. 297 Bit_Rate: 32 bits 299 In case of ODUflex including ODUflex(CBR) and ODUflex(GFP) Signal 300 Types, this field indicates the nominal bit rate of ODUflex 301 expressed in bytes per second, encoded as a 32-bit IEEE single- 302 precision floating-point number (referring to [RFC4506] and 303 [IEEE]). For other Signal Types, this field MUST be set to zero 304 on transmission and MUST be ignored on receipt and SHOULD be 305 passed unmodified by transit nodes. 307 5.1. Usage of ODUflex(CBR) Traffic Parameters 309 In case of ODUflex(CBR), the information of Bit_Rate carried in the 310 ODUflex Traffic Parameters MUST be used to determine the actual 311 bandwidth of ODUflex(CBR) (i.e., Bit_Rate * (1 +/- Tolerance)). 312 Therefore the total number of tributary slots N in the HO ODUk link 313 can be reserved correctly. Here: 315 N = Ceiling of 317 ODUflex(CBR) nominal bit rate * (1 + ODUflex(CBR) bit rate tolerance) 318 --------------------------------------------------------------------- 319 ODTUk.ts nominal bit rate * (1 - HO OPUk bit rate tolerance) 321 In this formula, the ODUflex(CBR) nominal bit rate is the bit rate of 322 the ODUflex(CBR) on the line side, i.e., the client signal bit rate 323 after applying the 239/238 factor (according to Clause 7.3, Table 7-2 324 of [G709-2012]) and the transcoding factor T (if needed) on the CBR 325 client. According to clauses 17.7.3, 17.7.4 and 17.7.5 of [G709- 326 2012]: 328 ODUflex(CBR) nominal bit rate = CBR client bit rate * (239/238) / T 330 The ODTUk.ts (Optical channel Data Tributary Unit k with ts tributary 331 slots) nominal bit rate is the nominal bit rate of the tributary slot 332 of ODUk, as shown in Table 1 (referring to Table 7-7 of [G709-2012]). 334 Table 1 - Actual TS bit rate of ODUk (in Kbps) 336 ODUk.ts Minimum Nominal Maximum 337 ----------------------------------------------------------- 338 ODU2.ts 1,249,384.632 1,249,409.620 1,249,434.608 339 ODU3.ts 1,254,678.635 1,254,703.729 1,254,728.823 340 ODU4.ts 1,301,683.217 1,301,709.251 1,301,735.285 342 Note that: 344 Minimum bit rate of ODUTk.ts = 345 ODTUk.ts nominal bit rate * (1 - HO OPUk bit rate tolerance) 347 Maximum bit rate of ODTUk.ts = 348 ODTUk.ts nominal bit rate * (1 + HO OPUk bit rate tolerance) 350 Where: HO OPUk bit rate tolerance = 20ppm 352 Note that the bit rate tolerance is implicit in Signal Type and the 353 ODUflex(CBR) bit rate tolerance is fixed and it is equal to 100ppm as 354 described in Table 7-2 of [G709-2012]. 356 Therefore, a node receiving a PATH message containing ODUflex(CBR) 357 nominal bit rate can allocate precise number of tributary slots and 358 set up the cross-connection for the ODUflex service. 360 Note that for different ODUk, the bit rates of the tributary slots 361 are different, and so the total number of tributary slots to be 362 reserved for the ODUflex(CBR) MAY not be the same on different HO 363 ODUk links. 365 An example is given below to illustrate the usage of ODUflex(CBR) 366 Traffic Parameters. 368 As shown in Figure 1, assume there is an ODUflex(CBR) service 369 requesting a bandwidth of (2.5Gbps, +/-100ppm) from node A to node C. 370 In other words, the ODUflex Traffic Parameters indicate that Signal 371 Type is 20 (ODUflex(CBR)), Bit_Rate is 2.5Gbps and Tolerance is 372 100ppm. 374 +-----+ +---------+ +-----+ 375 | +-------------+ +-----+ +-------------+ | 376 | +=============+\| ODU |/+=============+ | 377 | +=============+/| flex+-+=============+ | 378 | +-------------+ | |\+=============+ | 379 | +-------------+ +-----+ +-------------+ | 380 | | | | | | 381 | | ....... | | ....... | | 382 | A +-------------+ B +-------------+ C | 383 +-----+ HO ODU4 +---------+ HO ODU2 +-----+ 385 =========: TS occupied by ODUflex 386 ---------: free TS 388 Figure 1 - Example of ODUflex(CBR) Traffic Parameters 390 - On the HO ODU4 link between node A and B: 392 The maximum bit rate of the ODUflex(CBR) equals 2.5Gbps * (1 + 393 100ppm), and the minimum bit rate of the tributary slot of ODU4 394 equals 1,301,683.217 Kbps, so the total number of tributary slots 395 N1 to be reserved on this link is: 397 N1 = ceiling (2.5Gbps * (1 + 100ppm) / 1,301,683.217 Kbps) = 2 399 - On the HO ODU2 link between node B and C: 401 The maximum bit rate of the ODUflex equals 2.5Gbps * (1 + 402 100ppm), and the minimum bit rate of the tributary slot of ODU2 403 equals 1,249,384.632 Kbps, so the total number of tributary slots 404 N2 to be reserved on this link is: 406 N2 = ceiling (2.5Gbps * (1 + 100ppm) / 1,249,384.632 Kbps) = 3 408 5.2. Usage of ODUflex(GFP) Traffic Parameters 410 [G709-2012] recommends that the ODUflex(GFP) will fill an integral 411 number of tributary slots of the smallest HO ODUk path over which the 412 ODUflex(GFP) may be carried, as shown in Table 2. 414 Table 2 - Recommended ODUflex(GFP) bit rates and tolerance 416 ODU type | Nominal bit-rate | Tolerance 417 --------------------------------+------------------+----------- 418 ODUflex(GFP) of n TS, 1<=n<=8 | n * ODU2.ts | +/-100 ppm 419 ODUflex(GFP) of n TS, 9<=n<=32 | n * ODU3.ts | +/-100 ppm 420 ODUflex(GFP) of n TS, 33<=n<=80 | n * ODU4.ts | +/-100 ppm 422 According to this table, the Bit_Rate field for ODUflex(GFP) MUST 423 equal to one of the 80 values listed below: 425 1 * ODU2.ts; 2 * ODU2.ts; ...; 8 * ODU2.ts; 426 9 * ODU3.ts; 10 * ODU3.ts, ...; 32 * ODU3.ts; 427 33 * ODU4.ts; 34 * ODU4.ts; ...; 80 * ODU4.ts. 429 In this way, the number of required tributary slots for the 430 ODUflex(GFP) (i.e., the value of "n" in Table 2) can be deduced from 431 the Bit_Rate field. 433 5.3. Notification on Errors of OTN-TDM Traffic Parameters 435 There is no Adspec associated with the OTN-TDM SENDER_TSPEC. Either 436 the Adspec is omitted or an Int-serv Adspec with the Default General 437 Characterization Parameters and Guaranteed Service fragment is used, 438 see [RFC2210]. 440 For a particular sender in a session, the contents of the FLOWSPEC 441 object received in a Resv message SHOULD be identical to the contents 442 of the SENDER_TSPEC object received in the corresponding Path 443 message. If the objects do not match, a ResvErr message with a 444 "Traffic Control Error/Bad Flowspec value" error MUST be generated. 446 Intermediate and egress nodes MUST verify that the node itself, and 447 the interfaces on which the LSP will be established, can support the 448 requested Signal Type, NVC and Bit_Rate values. If the requested 449 value(s) cannot be supported, the receiver node MUST generate a 450 PathErr message with a "Traffic Control Error/Service unsupported" 451 indication (see [RFC2205]). 453 In addition, if the MT field is received with a zero value, the node 454 MUST generate a PathErr message with a "Traffic Control Error/Bad 455 Tspec value" indication (see [RFC2205]). 457 Further, if the Signal Type is not ODU1, ODU2 or ODU3, and the NVC 458 field is not 0, the node MUST generate a PathErr message with a 459 "Traffic Control Error/Bad Tspec value" indication (see [RFC2205]). 461 6. Generalized Label 463 This section defines the format of the OTN-TDM Generalized Label. 465 6.1. OTN-TDM Switching Type Generalized Label 467 The following is the Generalized Label format for that MUST be used 468 with the OTN-TDM Switching Type: 470 0 1 2 3 471 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 1 472 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 473 | TPN | Reserved | Length | 474 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 475 ~ Bit Map ...... ~ 476 ~ ...... | Padding Bits ~ 477 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 479 The OTN-TDM Generalized Label is used to indicate how the LO ODUj 480 signal is multiplexed into the HO ODUk link. Note that the LO OUDj 481 signal type is indicated by Traffic Parameters, while the type of HO 482 ODUk link is identified by the selected interface carried in the 483 IF_ID RSVP_HOP Object. 485 TPN (12 bits): indicates the TPN for the assigned Tributary Slot(s). 487 - In case of LO ODUj multiplexed into HO ODU1/ODU2/ODU3, only the 488 lower 6 bits of TPN field are significant and the other bits of 489 TPN MUST be set to 0. 491 - In case of LO ODUj multiplexed into HO ODU4, only the lower 7 492 bits of TPN field are significant and the other bits of TPN 493 MUST be set to 0. 495 - In case of ODUj mapped into OTUk (j=k), the TPN is not needed 496 and this field MUST be set to 0. 498 Per [G709-2012], The TPN is used to allow for correct demultiplexing 499 in the data plane. When an LO ODUj is multiplexed into HO ODUk 500 occupying one or more TSs, a new TPN value is configured at the two 501 ends of the HO ODUk link and is put into the related MSI byte(s) in 502 the OPUk overhead at the (traffic) ingress end of the link, so that 503 the other end of the link can learn which TS(s) is/are used by the LO 504 ODUj in the data plane. 506 According to [G709-2012], the TPN field MUST be set as according to 507 the following tables: 509 Table 3 - TPN Assignment Rules (2.5Gbps TS granularity) 510 +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 511 |HO ODUk|LO ODUj|TPN | TPN Assignment Rules | 512 +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 513 | ODU2 | ODU1 |1~4 |Fixed, = TS# occupied by ODU1 | 514 +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 515 | | ODU1 |1~16|Fixed, = TS# occupied by ODU1 | 516 | ODU3 +-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 517 | | ODU2 |1~4 |Flexible, != other existing LO ODU2s' TPNs | 518 +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 520 Table 4 - TPN Assignment Rules (1.25Gbps TS granularity) 521 +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 522 |HO ODUk|LO ODUj|TPN | TPN Assignment Rules | 523 +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 524 | ODU1 | ODU0 |1~2 |Fixed, = TS# occupied by ODU0 | 525 +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 526 | | ODU1 |1~4 |Flexible, != other existing LO ODU1s' TPNs | 527 | ODU2 +-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 528 | |ODU0 & |1~8 |Flexible, != other existing LO ODU0s and | 529 | |ODUflex| |ODUflexes' TPNs | 530 +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 531 | | ODU1 |1~16|Flexible, != other existing LO ODU1s' TPNs | 532 | +-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 533 | | ODU2 |1~4 |Flexible, != other existing LO ODU2s' TPNs | 534 | ODU3 +-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 535 | |ODU0 & | |Flexible, != other existing LO ODU0s and | 536 | |ODU2e &|1~32|ODU2es and ODUflexes' TPNs | 537 | |ODUflex| | | 538 +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 539 | ODU4 |Any ODU|1~80|Flexible, != ANY other existing LO ODUs' TPNs | 540 +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 542 Note that in the case of "Flexible", the value of TPN MAY not be 543 corresponding to the TS number as per [G709-2012]. 545 Length (12 bits): indicates the number of bits of the Bit Map field, 546 i.e., the total number of TS in the HO ODUk link. The valid values 547 for this field are 0, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32 and 80. 549 In case of an ODUk mapped into OTUk, there is no need to indicate 550 which tributary slots will be used, so the length field MUST be set 551 to 0. 553 Bit Map (variable): indicates which tributary slots in HO ODUk that 554 the LO ODUj will be multiplexed into. The sequence of the Bit Map is 555 consistent with the sequence of the tributary slots in HO ODUk. Each 556 bit in the bit map represents the corresponding tributary slot in HO 557 ODUk with a value of 1 or 0 indicating whether the tributary slot 558 will be used by LO ODUj or not. 560 Padding bits are added after the Bit Map to make the whole label a 561 multiple of four bytes if necessary. Padding bits MUST be set to 0 562 and MUST be ignored. 564 6.2. Procedures 566 The ingress node MUST generate a Path message and specify the OTN-TDM 567 Switching Type and corresponding G-PID in the Generalized Label 568 Request object, which MUST be processed as defined in [RFC3473]. 570 The ingress node of an LSP MAY include label ERO (Explicit Route 571 Object) to indicate the label in each hops along the path. Note that 572 the TPN in the label ERO subobject MAY not be assigned by the ingress 573 node. In this case, the node MUST assign a valid TPN value and then 574 put this value into TPN field of the label object when receiving a 575 Path message. 577 In order to create bidirectional LSP, the ingress node and upstream 578 node MUST generate an Upstream Label on the out outgoing interface to 579 indicate the reserved TSs of ODUk and the assigned TPN value in the 580 upstream direction. This Upstream Label is sent to the downstream 581 node via Path massage for upstream resource reservation. 583 The ingress node or upstream node MAY generate Label Set to indicate 584 which labels on the outgoing interface in the downstream direction 585 are acceptable. The downstream node will restrict its choice of 586 labels, i.e., TS resource and TPN value, to one which is in the Label 587 Set. 589 The ingress node or upstream node MAY also generate Suggested Label 590 to indicate the preference of TS resource and TPN value on the 591 outgoing interface in the downstream direction. The downstream node 592 is not REQUIRED to use the Suggested Label and MAY use another label 593 based on local decision and send it to the upstream node, as 594 described in [RFC3473]. 596 When an upstream node receives a Resv message containing an LABEL 597 object with an OTN-TDM label, it MUST firstly identify which ODU 598 Signal Type is multiplexed or mapped into which ODU Signal Type 599 accordingly to the Traffic Parameters and the IF_ID RSVP_HOP Object 600 in the received message. 602 - In case of ODUj to ODUk multiplexing, the node MUST retrieve the 603 reserved tributary slots in the ODUk by its downstream neighbor 604 node according to the position of the bits that are set to 1 in 605 the Bit Map field. The node determines the TS type (according to 606 the total TS number of the ODUk, or pre-configured TS type), so 607 that the node can multiplex the ODUj into the ODUk based on the TS 608 type. The node MUST also retrieve the TPN value assigned by its 609 downstream neighbor node from the label, and fill the TPN into the 610 related MSI byte(s) in the OPUk overhead in the data plane, so 611 that the downstream neighbor node can check whether the TPN 612 received from the data plane is consistent with the ExMSI and 613 determine whether there is any mismatch defect. Note that the 614 Length field in the label format MAY be used to indicate the TS 615 type of the HO ODUk (i.e., TS granularity at 1.25Gbps or 2.5Gbps) 616 since the HO ODUk type can be known from IF_ID RSVP_HOP Object. In 617 some cases when there is no Link Management Protocol (LMP) or 618 routing to make the two end points of the link to know the TSG, 619 the TSG information used by another end can be deduced from the 620 label format. For example, for HO ODU2 link, the value of the 621 length filed will be 4 or 8, which indicates the TS granularity is 622 2.5Gbps or 1.25Gbps, respectively. 624 - In case of ODUk to OTUk mapping, the size of Bit Map field MUST be 625 0 and no additional procedure is needed. 627 When a downstream node or egress node receives a Path message 628 containing Generalized Label Request object for setting up an ODUj 629 LSP from its upstream neighbor node, the node MUST generate an OTN- 630 TDM label according to the Signal Type of the requested LSP and the 631 free resources (i.e., free tributary slots of ODUk) that will be 632 reserved for the LSP, and send the label to its upstream neighbor 633 node. 635 - In case of ODUj to ODUk multiplexing, the node MUST firstly 636 determine the size of the Bit Map field according to the Signal 637 Type and the tributary slot type of ODUk, and then set the bits to 638 1 in the Bit Map field corresponding to the reserved tributary 639 slots. The node MUST also assign a valid TPN, which MUST NOT 640 collide with other TPN value used by existing LO ODU connections 641 in the selected HO ODU link, and configure the Expected MSI 642 (ExMSI) using this TPN. Then, the assigned TPN MUST be filled into 643 the label. 645 - In case of ODUk to OTUk mapping, TPN field MUST be set to 0. Bit 646 Map information is not REQUIRED and MUST NOT be included, so 647 Length field MUST be set to 0 as well. 649 6.2.1. Notification on Label Error 651 When an upstream node receives a Resv message containing an LABEL 652 object with an OTN-TDM label, the node MUST verify if the label is 653 acceptable. If the label is not acceptable, the node MUST generate a 654 ResvErr message with a "Routing problem/Unacceptable label value" 655 indication. Per [RFC3473], the generated ResvErr message MAY include 656 an ACCEPTABLE_LABEL_SET object. With the exception of label 657 semantics, downstream node processing a received ResvErr messages and 658 of ACCEPTABLE_LABEL_SET objects is not modified by this document. 660 Similarly, when a downstream node receives a Path message containing 661 an UPSTREAM_LABEL object with an OTN-TDM label, the node MUST verify 662 if the label is acceptable. If the label is not acceptable, the node 663 MUST generate a PathErr message with a "Routing problem/Unacceptable 664 label value" indication. Per [RFC3473], the generated ResvErr message 665 MAY include an ACCEPTABLE_LABEL_SET object. With the exception of 666 label semantics, downstream node processing received PathErr messages 667 and of ACCEPTABLE_LABEL_SET objects is not modified by this document. 669 A received label SHALL be considered unacceptable when one of the 670 following cases occurs: 672 - The received label doesn't conform to local policy; 674 - Invalid value in the length field; 676 - The selected link only supports 2.5Gbps TS granularity while the 677 Length field in the label along with ODUk Signal Type indicates 678 the 1.25Gbps TS granularity; 680 - The label includes an invalid TPN value that breaks the TPN 681 assignment rules; 683 - The indicated resources (i.e., the number of "1" in the Bit Map 684 field) are inconsistent with the Traffic Parameters. 686 6.3. Supporting Virtual Concatenation and Multiplication 688 Per [RFC6344], the Virtual Concatenation Groups (VCGs) can be created 689 using Co-Signaled style or Multiple LSPs style. 691 In case of Co-Signaled style, the explicit ordered list of all labels 692 MUST reflect the order of VCG members, which is similar to [RFC4328]. 693 In case of multiplexed virtually concatenated signals (NVC > 1), the 694 first label MUST indicate the components of the first virtually 695 concatenated signal; the second label MUST indicate the components of 696 the second virtually concatenated signal; and so on. In case of 697 multiplication of multiplexed virtually concatenated signals (MT > 698 1), the first label MUST indicate the components of the first 699 multiplexed virtually concatenated signal; the second label MUST 700 indicate components of the second multiplexed virtually concatenated 701 signal; and so on. 703 Support for Virtual Concatenation of ODU1, ODU2 and ODU3 Signal 704 Types, as defined by [RFC6344], is not modified by this document. 705 Virtual Concatenation of other Signal Types is not supported by 706 [G709-2012]. 708 Multiplier (MT) usage is as defined in [RFC6344] and [RFC4328]. 710 6.4. Examples 712 The following examples are given in order to illustrate the label 713 format described in Section 6.1 of this document. 715 (1) ODUk into OTUk mapping: 717 In such conditions, the downstream node along an LSP returns a label 718 indicating that the ODUk (k=1, 2, 3, 4) is directly mapped into the 719 corresponding OTUk. The following example label indicates an ODU1 720 mapped into OTU1. 722 0 1 2 3 723 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 1 724 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 725 | TPN = 0 | Reserved | Length = 0 | 726 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 728 (2) ODUj into ODUk multiplexing: 730 In such conditions, this label indicates that an ODUj is multiplexed 731 into several tributary slots of OPUk and then mapped into OTUk. Some 732 instances are shown as follow: 734 - ODU0 into ODU2 Multiplexing: 736 0 1 2 3 737 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 1 738 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 739 | TPN = 2 | Reserved | Length = 8 | 740 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 741 |0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0| Padding Bits (0) | 742 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 744 This above label indicates an ODU0 multiplexed into the second 745 tributary slot of ODU2, wherein there are 8 TS in ODU2 (i.e., the 746 type of the tributary slot is 1.25Gbps), and the TPN value is 2. 748 - ODU1 into ODU2 Multiplexing with 1.25Gbps TS granularity: 750 0 1 2 3 751 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 1 752 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 753 | TPN = 1 | Reserved | Length = 8 | 754 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 755 |0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0| Padding Bits (0) | 756 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 758 This above label indicates an ODU1 multiplexed into the 2nd and the 759 4th tributary slot of ODU2, wherein there are 8 TS in ODU2 (i.e., the 760 type of the tributary slot is 1.25Gbps), and the TPN value is 1. 762 - ODU2 into ODU3 Multiplexing with 2.5Gbps TS granularity: 764 0 1 2 3 765 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 1 766 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 767 | TPN = 1 | Reserved | Length = 16 | 768 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 769 |0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0| Padding Bits (0) | 770 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 772 This above label indicates an ODU2 multiplexed into the 2nd, 3rd, 5th 773 and 7th tributary slot of ODU3, wherein there are 16 TS in ODU3 774 (i.e., the type of the tributary slot is 2.5Gbps), and the TPN value 775 is 1. 777 7. Supporting Hitless Adjustment of ODUflex (GFP) 779 [G7044] describes the procedure of ODUflex (GFP) hitless resizing 780 using Link Connection Resize (LCR) and Bandwidth Resize (BWR) 781 protocols in OTN data plane. 783 For the control plane, signaling messages are REQUIRED to initiate 784 the adjustment procedure. Section 2.5 and Section 4.6.4 of [RFC3209] 785 describe how the Shared Explicit (SE) style is used in Traffic 786 Engineering (TE) network for bandwidth increasing and decreasing, 787 which is still applicable for triggering the ODUflex (GFP) adjustment 788 procedure in data plane. 790 Note that the SE style MUST be used at the beginning when creating a 791 resizable ODUflex connection (Signal Type = 21). Otherwise an error 792 with Error Code "Conflicting reservation style" MUST be generated 793 when performing bandwidth adjustment. 795 - Bandwidth increasing 797 For the ingress node, in order to increase the bandwidth of an 798 ODUflex (GFP) connection, a Path message with SE style (keeping 799 Tunnel ID unchanged and assigning a new LSP ID) MUST be sent 800 along the path. 802 The ingress node will trigger the BWR protocol when successful 803 completion of LCR protocols on every hop after Resv message is 804 processed. On success of BWR, the ingress node SHOULD send a 805 PathTear message to delete the old control state (i.e., the 806 control state of the ODUflex (GFP) before resizing) on the 807 control plane. 809 A downstream node receiving Path message with SE style compares 810 the old Traffic Parameters (stored locally) with the new one 811 carried in the Path message, to determine the number of TS to be 812 added. After choosing and reserving new free TS, the downstream 813 node MUST send back a Resv message carrying both the old and new 814 LABEL Objects in the SE flow descriptor. 816 An upstream neighbor receiving Resv message with SE flow 817 descriptor MUST determine which TS are added and trigger the LCR 818 protocol between itself and its downstream neighbor node. 820 - Bandwidth decreasing 822 For the ingress node, a Path message with SE style SHOULD also be 823 sent for ODUflex bandwidth decreasing. 825 The ingress node will trigger the BWR protocol when successful 826 completion of LCR handshake on every hop after Resv message is 827 processed. On success of BWR, the second step of LCR, i.e., link 828 connection decrease procedure will be started on every hop of the 829 connection. After completion of bandwidth decreasing, the ingress 830 node SHOULD send a ResvErr message to tear down the old control 831 state. 833 A downstream node receiving Path message with SE style compares 834 the old Traffic Parameters with the new one carried in the Path 835 message to determine the number of TS to be decreased. After 836 choosing TSs to be decreased, the downstream node MUST send back 837 a Resv message carrying both the old and new LABEL Objects in the 838 SE flow descriptor. 840 An upstream neighbor receiving Resv message with SE flow 841 descriptor MUST determine which TS are decreased and trigger the 842 first step of LCR protocol (i.e., LCR handshake) between itself 843 and its downstream neighbor node. 845 8. Control Plane Backward Compatibility Considerations 847 As described in [OTN-FWK], since the [RFC4328] has been deployed in 848 the network for the nodes that support the 2001 revision of the G.709 849 specification, control plane backward compatibility SHOULD be taken 850 into consideration. More specifically: 852 o Nodes supporting this document SHOULD support [OTN-OSPF]. 854 o Nodes supporting this document MAY support [RFC4328] signaling. 856 o A node supporting both sets of procedures (i.e., [RFC4328] and 857 this document) is not REQUIRED to signal an LSP using both 858 procedures, i.e., to act as a signaling version translator. 860 o Ingress nodes that support both sets of procedures MAY select 861 which set of procedures to follow based on routing information or 862 local policy. 864 o Per [RFC3473], nodes that do not support this document will 865 generate a PathErr message, with a "Routing problem/Switching 866 Type" indication. 868 9. Security Considerations 870 This document introduces no new security considerations to the 871 existing GMPLS signaling protocols. Referring to [RFC3473] and 872 [RFC4328], further details of the specific security measures are 873 provided. Additionally, [RFC5920] provides an overview of security 874 vulnerabilities and protection mechanisms for the GMPLS control 875 plane. 877 10. IANA Considerations 879 Three RSVP C-Types are defined for OTN-TDM Traffic Parameters and 880 OTN-TDM Generalized Label in this document: 881 http://www.iana.org/assignments/rsvp-parameters 883 - OTN-TDM SENDER_TSPEC and FLOWSPEC objects: 885 o OTN-TDM SENDER_TSPEC Object: Class = 12, C-Type = 7 (see 886 Section 5) 888 o OTN-TDM FLOWSPEC Object: Class = 9, C-Type = 7 (see Section 5) 890 IANA maintains the "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching 891 (GMPLS) Signaling Parameters" registry (see 892 http://www.iana.org/assignments/gmpls-sig-parameters). "Generalized 893 PIDs (G-PID)" subregistry is included in this registry, which will be 894 extended and updated by this document as below: 896 - Generalized PID (G-PID): 898 Name: G-PID 900 Format: 16-bit number 902 Values: 904 [0..31, 36..46] defined in [RFC3471] 905 [32] defined in [RFC3471] and updated by Section 4 906 [33..35] defined in [RFC3471] and updated by [RFC4328] 907 [47, 49..52] defined in [RFC4328] and updated by Section 4 908 [48, 53..58] defined in [RFC4328] 909 [59..63] defined in Section 4 of this document 911 Allocation Policy (as defined in [RFC4328]): 913 [0..31743] Assigned by IANA via IETF Standards Track RFC 914 Action. 915 [31744..32767] Assigned temporarily for Experimental Usage 916 [32768..65535] Not assigned. Before any assignments can be 917 made in this range, there MUST be a Standards 918 Track RFC that specifies IANA Considerations 919 that covers the range being assigned. 921 "Signal Type" subregistry to the "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label 922 Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Parameters" will be defined by this 923 document as below: 925 Value Signal Type Reference 926 ----- ----------- --------- 927 0 Not significant [RFC4328] 928 1 ODU1 (i.e., 2.5 Gbps) [RFC4328] 929 2 ODU2 (i.e., 10 Gbps) [RFC4328] 930 3 ODU3 (i.e., 40 Gbps) [RFC4328] 931 4 ODU4 (i.e., 100 Gbps) [this document] 932 5 Reserved (for future use) [RFC4328] 933 6 Och at 2.5 Gbps [RFC4328] 934 7 OCh at 10 Gbps [RFC4328] 935 8 OCh at 40 Gbps [RFC4328] 936 9 OCh at 100 Gbps [this document] 937 10 ODU0 (i.e., 1.25 Gbps) [this document] 938 11 ODU2e (i.e., 10Gbps for FC1200 [this document] 939 and GE LAN) 940 12~19 Reserved (for future use) [this document] 941 20 ODUflex(CBR) (i.e., 1.25*N Gbps) [this document] 942 21 ODUflex(GFP-F), resizable [this document] 943 (i.e., 1.25*N Gbps) 944 22 ODUflex(GFP-F), non resizable [this document] 945 (i.e., 1.25*N Gbps) 946 23~255 Reserved (for future use) [this document] 948 11. References 950 11.1. Normative References 952 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 953 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 955 [RFC2205] Braden, R., Zhang, L., Berson, S., Herzog, S., and S. 956 Jamin, "Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP) -- Version 1 957 Functional Specification", RFC 2205, September 1997. 959 [RFC2210] Wroclawski, J., "The Use of RSVP with IETF Integrated 960 Services", RFC 2210, September 1997. 962 [RFC3209] D. Awduche et al, "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP 963 Tunnels", RFC3209, December 2001. 965 [RFC3471] Berger, L., Editor, "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label 966 Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Functional Description", RFC 967 3471, January 2003. 969 [RFC3473] L. Berger, Ed., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching 970 (GMPLS) Signaling Resource ReserVation Protocol-Traffic 971 Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions", RFC 3473, January 2003. 973 [RFC4328] D. Papadimitriou, Ed. "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label 974 Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Extensions for G.709 Optical 975 Transport Networks Control", RFC 4328, Jan 2006. 977 [RFC6344] G. Bernstein et al, "Operating Virtual Concatenation (VCAT) 978 and the Link Capacity Adjustment Scheme (LCAS) with 979 Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)", 980 RFC6344, August 2011. 982 11.2. Informative References 984 [OTN-FWK] Fatai Zhang et al, "Framework for GMPLS and PCE Control of 985 G.709 Optical Transport Networks", Work in Progress: draft- 986 ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g709-framework, February 2013. 988 [OTN-INFO] S. Belotti et al, "Information model for G.709 Optical 989 Transport Networks (OTN)", Work in Progress: draft-ietf- 990 ccamp-otn-g709-info-model, April 2013. 992 [OTN-OSPF] D. Ceccarelli et al, "Traffic Engineering Extensions to 993 OSPF for Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Control of Evolving G.709 994 OTN Networks", Work in Progress: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls- 995 ospf-g709v3, April 2013. 997 [G709-2012] ITU-T, "Interfaces for the Optical Transport Network 998 (OTN)", G.709/Y.1331 Recommendation, February 2012. 1000 [G7044] ITU-T, "Hitless adjustment of ODUflex", G.7044/Y.1347, 1001 October 2011. 1003 [RFC4506] M. Eisler, Ed., "XDR: External Data Representation 1004 Standard", RFC 4506, May 2006. 1006 [RFC5920] Fang, L., Ed., "Security Framework for MPLS and GMPLS 1007 Networks", RFC5920, July 2010. 1009 [IEEE] "IEEE Standard for Binary Floating-Point Arithmetic", 1010 ANSI/IEEE Standard 754-1985, Institute of Electrical and 1011 Electronics Engineers, August 1985. 1013 12. Contributors 1015 Jonathan Sadler, Tellabs 1016 Email: jonathan.sadler@tellabs.com 1018 Kam LAM, Alcatel-Lucent 1019 Email: kam.lam@alcatel-lucent.com 1021 Xiaobing Zi, Huawei Technologies 1022 Email: zixiaobing@huawei.com 1024 Francesco Fondelli, Ericsson 1025 Email: francesco.fondelli@ericsson.com 1027 Lyndon Ong, Ciena 1028 Email: lyong@ciena.com 1030 Biao Lu, infinera 1031 Email: blu@infinera.com 1033 13. Authors' Addresses 1035 Fatai Zhang (editor) 1036 Huawei Technologies 1037 F3-5-B R&D Center, Huawei Base 1038 Bantian, Longgang District 1039 Shenzhen 518129 P.R.China 1040 Phone: +86-755-28972912 1041 Email: zhangfatai@huawei.com 1043 Guoying Zhang 1044 China Academy of Telecommunication Research of MII 1045 11 Yue Tan Nan Jie Beijing, P.R.China 1046 Phone: +86-10-68094272 1047 Email: zhangguoying@mail.ritt.com.cn 1049 Sergio Belotti 1050 Alcatel-Lucent 1051 Optics CTO 1052 Via Trento 30 20059 Vimercate (Milano) Italy 1053 +39 039 6863033 1054 Email: sergio.belotti@alcatel-lucent.it 1056 Daniele Ceccarelli 1057 Ericsson 1058 Via A. Negrone 1/A 1059 Genova - Sestri Ponente 1060 Italy 1061 Email: daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com 1063 Khuzema Pithewan 1064 Infinera Corporation 1065 169, Java Drive 1066 Sunnyvale, CA-94089, USA 1067 Email: kpithewan@infinera.com 1068 Yi Lin 1069 Huawei Technologies 1070 F3-5-B R&D Center, Huawei Base 1071 Bantian, Longgang District 1072 Shenzhen 518129 P.R.China 1073 Phone: +86-755-28972914 1074 Email: yi.lin@huawei.com 1076 Yunbin Xu 1077 China Academy of Telecommunication Research of MII 1078 11 Yue Tan Nan Jie Beijing, P.R.China 1079 Phone: +86-10-68094134 1080 Email: xuyunbin@mail.ritt.com.cn 1082 Pietro Grandi 1083 Alcatel-Lucent 1084 Optics CTO 1085 Via Trento 30 20059 Vimercate (Milano) Italy 1086 +39 039 6864930 1087 Email: pietro_vittorio.grandi@alcatel-lucent.it 1089 Diego Caviglia 1090 Ericsson 1091 Via A. Negrone 1/A 1092 Genova - Sestri Ponente 1093 Italy 1094 Email: diego.caviglia@ericsson.com 1096 Rajan Rao 1097 Infinera Corporation 1098 169, Java Drive 1099 Sunnyvale, CA-94089 1100 USA 1101 Email: rrao@infinera.com 1102 John E Drake 1103 Juniper 1104 Email: jdrake@juniper.net 1106 Igor Bryskin 1107 Adva Optical 1108 EMail: IBryskin@advaoptical.com 1110 14. Acknowledgment 1112 The authors would like to thank Lou Berger and Deborah Brungard for 1113 their useful comments to the document. 1115 Intellectual Property 1117 The IETF Trust takes no position regarding the validity or scope of 1118 any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be 1119 claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology 1120 described in any IETF Document or the extent to which any license 1121 under such rights might or might not be available; nor does it 1122 represent that it has made any independent effort to identify any 1123 such rights. 1125 Copies of Intellectual Property disclosures made to the IETF 1126 Secretariat and any assurances of licenses to be made available, or 1127 the result of an attempt made to obtain a general license or 1128 permission for the use of such proprietary rights by implementers or 1129 users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR 1130 repository at http://www.ietf.org/ipr 1132 The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any 1133 copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary 1134 rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement 1135 any standard or specification contained in an IETF Document. Please 1136 address the information to the IETF at ietf-ipr@ietf.org. 1138 The definitive version of an IETF Document is that published by, or 1139 under the auspices of, the IETF. Versions of IETF Documents that are 1140 published by third parties, including those that are translated into 1141 other languages, should not be considered to be definitive versions 1142 of IETF Documents. The definitive version of these Legal Provisions 1143 is that published by, or under the auspices of, the IETF. Versions of 1144 these Legal Provisions that are published by third parties, including 1145 those that are translated into other languages, should not be 1146 considered to be definitive versions of these Legal Provisions. 1148 For the avoidance of doubt, each Contributor to the IETF Standards 1149 Process licenses each Contribution that he or she makes as part of 1150 the IETF Standards Process to the IETF Trust pursuant to the 1151 provisions of RFC 5378. No language to the contrary, or terms, 1152 conditions or rights that differ from or are inconsistent with the 1153 rights and licenses granted under RFC 5378, shall have any effect and 1154 shall be null and void, whether published or posted by such 1155 Contributor, or included with or in such Contribution. 1157 Disclaimer of Validity 1159 All IETF Documents and the information contained therein are provided 1160 on an "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE 1161 REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE 1162 IETF TRUST AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL 1163 WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY 1164 WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION THEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE 1165 ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS 1166 FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. 1168 Copyright Notice 1170 Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 1171 document authors. All rights reserved. 1173 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 1174 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 1175 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 1176 publication of this document. Please review these documents 1177 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 1178 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 1179 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 1180 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 1181 described in the Simplified BSD License.