idnits 2.17.1 draft-rao-ccamp-mlnmrn-otn-ospfte-ext-02.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The document seems to lack separate sections for Informative/Normative References. All references will be assumed normative when checking for downward references. ** The document seems to lack a both a reference to RFC 2119 and the recommended RFC 2119 boilerplate, even if it appears to use RFC 2119 keywords. RFC 2119 keyword, line 156: '...r upper SC and Encoding type MUST have...' RFC 2119 keyword, line 200: '...al i.e. OTN or SONET/SDH, MUST include...' RFC 2119 keyword, line 203: '...ion, the path computing node MUST look...' Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (July 10, 2013) is 3941 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) == Unused Reference: 'RFC5212' is defined on line 304, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC6001' is defined on line 308, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC4606' is defined on line 313, but no explicit reference was found in the text ** Downref: Normative reference to an Informational RFC: RFC 5212 -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'GMPLS-OTN-OSPF' Summary: 3 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 4 warnings (==), 2 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 INTERNET-DRAFT Khuzema Pithewan 3 Intended Status: Standard Track Rajan Rao 4 Infinera 5 Expires: January 11, 2014 July 10, 2013 7 OSPF-TE extensions for MLNMRN based on OTN 8 draft-rao-ccamp-mlnmrn-otn-ospfte-ext-02.txt 10 Abstract 12 This document specifies OSPF extensions for multi-layer/multi-region 13 where one of the regions is OTN. 15 Status of this Memo 17 This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the 18 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 20 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 21 Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that 22 other groups may also distribute working documents as 23 Internet-Drafts. 25 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 26 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 27 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 28 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 30 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at 31 http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html 33 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at 34 http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html 36 Copyright and License Notice 38 Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 39 document authors. All rights reserved. 41 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 42 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 43 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 44 publication of this document. Please review these documents 45 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 46 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 47 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 48 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 49 described in the Simplified BSD License. 51 Table of Contents 53 1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 54 2. OTN Layer Identification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 55 3. Interface Adjustment Capability Extensions for OTN . . . . . . 4 56 4. SONET/SDH Layer Identification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 57 5. Interface Adjustment Capability Extensions for SONET/SDH . . . 5 58 6 Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 59 7 Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 60 8 IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 61 9 Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 62 10 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 63 11 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 65 1 Introduction 67 This document specifies the OSPF extensions required to work in 68 multi-region networks involving OTN. The specification is based on 69 the requirement as specified in RFC 5212. As per the said RFC, ISCD 70 characterizes the information associated to one or more network 71 layers. Same RFC also says that the information about the adjustment 72 capabilities of the nodes in the network allow the path computation 73 process to select an end-to-end multi-layer or multi- region path 74 that includes links with different switching capabilities joined by 75 LSRs that can adapt (i.e., adjust) the signal between the links. By 76 inference, information about the adjustment capabilities should be 77 able to identify a layer in ISCD, if ISCD specifies more than one 78 layer. 80 RFC6001 specifies how to advertise adjustment capabilities between 81 two switching regions. IACD definition has provision to extend it for 82 a specific technology through Adjustment Capability Specific 83 information (ACSI) field, if required. ACSI field can be used to 84 identify a layer in the multi-layer ISCD. OTN being defined as multi- 85 layer ISCD, the corresponding IACD needs to be extended to be able to 86 carry layer identification so as to enable multi-layer/multi-region 87 path computation. similar to OTN, legacy SONET/SDH also has fixed 88 multiplexing hierarchy. Adaptation layer in SONET/SDH hierarchy 89 requires identification information in ACSI, in order to adapt 90 SONET/SDH signal to OTN and vice versa. 92 If the interface does not support de-multiplexing, then layer 93 identification is not required. Hence, Layer ID sub-TLV is optional. 95 2. OTN Layer Identification 97 [GMPLS-OTN-OSPF] defines attributes that identifies a layer in multi- 98 layer OTN ISCD. These attributes are part of Bandwidth sub-TLV in 99 Switch capability specific information of ISCD. These attributes are 100 reproduced here for completeness sake. 102 * Signal Type: Layer for which bandwidth is being advertised. 103 * Hierarchy : also called as multiplexing branch that specifies all 104 the layers between server layer and signal type. 105 * TSG : Time Slot Granularity 107 Absence of this sub-TLV for OTN means that the OTN ISCD doesn't 108 support multiplexing. 110 3. Interface Adjustment Capability Extensions for OTN 112 RFC6001 defines IACD sub-TLV as follows. Please refer to the RFC for 113 definition of individual fields of the sub-TLV. 114 0 1 2 3 115 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 1 116 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 117 | Lower SC | Lower Encoding| Upper SC | Upper Encoding| 118 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 119 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 0 | 120 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 121 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 1 | 122 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 123 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 2 | 124 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 125 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 3 | 126 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 127 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 4 | 128 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 129 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 5 | 130 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 131 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 6 | 132 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 133 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 7 | 134 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 135 | Adjustment Capability-specific information | 136 | (variable) | 137 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 139 Adjustment Capability-specific information abbreviated as ACSI 140 henceforth for OTN G.709v3 carries LayerID Sub-TLV which is defined 141 as follows 143 0 1 2 3 144 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 1 145 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 146 | Type = 1 |R| Reserved | Length | 147 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 148 | Signal type | Num of stages |TSG | Res | Stage#1 | 149 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 150 | Stage#2 | ... | Stage#N | Padding | 151 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 153 The definition & meaning of fields used in the above sub-TLV is same 154 as in bandwidth sub-TLV of ISCD as defined in [GMPLS-OTN-OSPF]. This 155 LayerID sub-TLV is applicable only when one of the regions is OTN, 156 which means either lower or upper SC and Encoding type MUST have 157 Switch Cap as OTN-TDM and encoding type as G.709 ODUk. 159 R bit is used to make sense whether the Layer ID is for Lower region 160 or upper region. 1 means upper region and 0 means lower. 162 The 8 priorities of the BW as defined in main IACD structure, is 163 adjustment capability between the two regions where one of the region 164 is identifies by LayerID sub-TLV. 166 4. SONET/SDH Layer Identification 168 G.707 defines the structure of SDH multiplexing hierarchy and RFC 169 4606 defines generalized label structure needed to fully specify 170 SONET/SDH multiplexing hierarchy. This Label structure also referred 171 as SUKLM structure identifies all the layers of the multiplexing 172 hierarchy along with time slots. For the purpose of this draft, only 173 layer identification is needed, hence each layer can be identified by 174 a bit. Bit value 1 signifies presence of the layer and 0, its 175 absence. 5 Bits, each representing one layer is sufficient to fully 176 identify the SONET/SDH multiplexing hierarchy. 178 Absence of sub-TLV means that the SONET/SDH ISCD doesn't support 179 multiplexing and needs only transparent mapping to other Interface. 181 5. Interface Adjustment Capability Extensions for SONET/SDH 183 Layer ID sub TLV for SONET/SDH is defined as follows 185 0 1 2 3 186 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 1 187 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 188 | Type = 2 |R| Reserved | Length | 189 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 190 |S|U|K|L|M| Padding | 191 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 193 SUKLM bits signifies the presence of SONET/SDH layers and these bits 194 together fully specifies the multiplexing hierarchy. Refer to Section 195 3 of RFC 4606 for full specification of SUKLM bits. 197 6 Procedure 199 A node advertising IACD for the bandwidth between regions where one 200 or both of them are hierarchical i.e. OTN or SONET/SDH, MUST include 201 the Layer ID sub-TLV as part of ACSI as defined above. 203 For multi-region path computation, the path computing node MUST look 204 at the LayerID sub-TLV (in ACSI part of IACD) if lower/upper {SC,Enc] 205 is {OTN-TDM,G.709ODUk} or {TDM,SONET/SDH} to identify the layer for 206 correct layer for BW check. 208 7 Examples 210 This section exemplifies TLV values for various technology region 211 combinations, where one of the region is OTN 213 a. Ethernet and OTN When upper region is Ethernet and lower region 214 is OTN 216 0 1 2 3 217 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 1 218 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 219 | PSC-1 | Ethernet | OTN-TDM | G.709 ODUk | 220 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 221 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 0 | 222 | / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / | 223 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 7 | 224 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 225 | Type = 1 |0| Reserved | Length | 226 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 227 | Signal type | Num of stages |TSG | Res | Stage#1 | 228 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 229 | Stage#2 | ... | Stage#N | Padding | 230 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 232 b. OTN and FlexChannel 233 0 1 2 3 234 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 1 235 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 236 | OTN-TDM | G.709 ODUk | SCSC | Lambda | 237 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 238 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 0 | 239 | / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / | 240 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 7 | 241 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 242 | Type = 1 |1| Reserved | Length | 243 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 244 | Signal type | Num of stages |TSG | Res | Stage#1 | 245 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 246 | Stage#2 | ... | Stage#N | Padding | 247 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 249 c. OTN and SONET/SDH 250 0 1 2 3 251 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 1 252 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 253 | OTN-TDM | G.709 ODUk | TDM | Sonet/SDH | 254 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 255 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 0 | 256 | / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / | 257 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 7 | 258 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 259 | Type = 1 |1| Reserved | Length | 260 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 261 | Signal type | Num of stages |TSG | Res | Stage#1 | 262 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 263 | Stage#2 | ... | Stage#N | Padding | 264 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 265 | Type = 2 |0| Reserved | Length | 266 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 267 |S|U|K|L|M| Padding | 268 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 270 d. OTN and OTN 272 0 1 2 3 273 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 1 274 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 275 | OTN-TDM | G.709 ODUk | OTN-TDM | G.709 ODUk | 276 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 277 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 0 | 278 | / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / | 279 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 7 | 280 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 281 | Type = 1 |0| Reserved | Length | 282 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 283 | Signal type | Num of stages |TSG | Res | Stage#1 | 284 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 285 | Stage#2 | ... | Stage#N | Padding | 286 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 287 | Type = 1 |1| Reserved | Length | 288 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 289 | Signal type | Num of stages |TSG | Res | Stage#1 | 290 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 291 | Stage#2 | ... | Stage#N | Padding | 292 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 294 8 IANA Considerations 296 TBD 298 9 Security Considerations 300 TBD 302 10 References 304 [RFC5212] K. Shiomoto, Papadimitriou, D.,JL. Le Roux, Vigoureux, M., 305 Brungard, D., "Requirements for GMPLS-Based Multi-Layer 306 and Multi-Region Networks (MLN/ MRN)",RFC 5212, July 2008. 308 [RFC6001] Papadimitriou, D., Vigoureux, M., Shiomoto, K., Brungard, 309 D., and JL. Le Roux, "Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Protocol 310 Extensions for Multi-Layer and Multi-Region Networks 311 (MLN/MRN)", RFC 6001, October 2010. 313 [RFC4606] E. Mannie, Perceval, D. Papadimitriou, "Generalized Multi- 314 Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Extensions for 315 Synchronous Optical Network (SONET) and Synchronous 316 Digital Hierarchy (SDH) Control", RFC 4606, Aug 2006 318 [GMPLS-OTN-OSPF] Traffic Engineering Extensions to OSPF for 319 Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) 321 11 Authors' Addresses 323 Khuzema Pithewan 324 Infinera 325 140 Caspian Ct., Sunnyvale, CA 94089 326 Email: kpithewan@infinera.com 328 Rajan Rao 329 Infinera 330 140 Caspian Ct., Sunnyvale, CA 94089 331 Email: rrao@infinera.com