idnits 2.17.1 draft-zhang-ccamp-gmpls-evolving-g709-04.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** There are 4 instances of too long lines in the document, the longest one being 1 character in excess of 72. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (February 27, 2010) is 5173 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: 'RFC4606' is mentioned on line 368, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'G.709' is mentioned on line 421, but not defined -- Possible downref: Normative reference to a draft: ref. 'VCAT-LCAS' -- No information found for draft-zhang-ccamp-gmpls-g - is the name correct? -- Possible downref: Normative reference to a draft: ref. 'OTN-LMP' Summary: 1 error (**), 0 flaws (~~), 3 warnings (==), 4 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 Network Working Group Fatai Zhang 2 Internet Draft Huawei 3 Category: Standards Track Guoying Zhang 4 CATR 5 Sergio Belotti 6 Alcatel-Lucent 7 D. Ceccarelli 8 Ericsson 9 Expires: August 2010 February 27, 2010 11 Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling 12 Extensions for the evolving G.709 Optical Transport Networks Control 14 draft-zhang-ccamp-gmpls-evolving-g709-04.txt 16 Status of this Memo 18 This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with 19 the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 21 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 22 Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that 23 other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- 24 Drafts. 26 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 27 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 28 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 29 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 31 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at 32 http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. 34 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at 35 http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. 37 This Internet-Draft will expire on August 26, 2010. 39 Abstract 41 Recent progress in ITU-T Recommendation G.709 standardization has 42 introduced new ODU containers (ODU0, ODU4, ODU2e and ODUflex) and 43 enhanced Optical Transport Networking (OTN) flexibility. Several 44 recent documents have proposed ways to modify GMPLS signaling 45 protocols to support these new OTN features. 47 It is important that a single solution is developed for use in GMPLS 48 signaling and routing protocols. This solution must support ODUk 49 multiplexing capabilities, address all of the new features, be 50 acceptable to all equipment vendors, and be extensible considering 51 continued OTN evolution. 53 This document describes the extensions to the Generalized Multi- 54 Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) signaling to control the evolutive 55 Optical Transport Networks (OTN) addressing ODUk multiplexing and new 56 features including ODU0, ODU4, ODU2e and ODUflex. 58 Conventions used in this document 60 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 61 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 62 document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. 64 Table of Contents 66 1. Introduction..................................................3 67 2. Terminology...................................................4 68 3. GMPLS Extensions for the Evolutive G.709 - Overview...........4 69 4. Extensions for Traffic Parameters for the Evolutive G.709.....5 70 4.1. Usage of ODUflex traffic parameter.......................7 71 4.2. Example of ODUflex traffic parameter.....................8 72 5. Generalized Label.............................................9 73 5.1. New definition of ODUk label.............................9 74 5.2. Examples................................................11 75 5.3. Label Distribution Procedure............................12 76 5.4. Backward Compatibility Considerations...................13 77 5.4.1. Control Plane Backward Compatibility Considerations13 78 5.4.2. Data Plane Backward Compatibility Considerations...14 79 5.5. Collision management....................................15 80 6. Security Considerations......................................15 81 7. IANA Considerations..........................................15 82 8. References...................................................15 83 8.1. Normative References....................................15 84 8.2. Informative References..................................16 85 9. Authors' Addresses...........................................17 86 Acknowledgment..................................................18 88 1. Introduction 90 Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) [RFC3945] extends 91 MPLS to include Layer-2 Switching (L2SC), Time-Division Multiplex 92 (e.g., SONET/SDH, PDH, and ODU), Wavelength (OCh, Lambdas) Switching, 93 and Spatial Switching (e.g., incoming port or fiber to outgoing port 94 or fiber). [RFC3471] presents a functional description of the 95 extensions to Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) signaling 96 required to support Generalized MPLS. RSVP-TE-specific formats and 97 mechanisms and technology specific details are defined in [RFC3473]. 99 With the evolution and deployment of G.709 technology, it is 100 necessary that appropriate enhanced control technology support be 101 provided for G.709. [RFC4328] describes the control technology 102 details that are specific to foundation G.709 Optical Transport 103 Networks (OTN), as specified in the ITU-T G.709 recommendation [ITUT- 104 G709], for ODUk deployments without multiplexing. 106 In addition to increasing need to support ODUk multiplexing, the 107 evolution of OTN has introduced additional containers and new 108 flexibility. For example, ODU0, ODU2e, ODU4 containers as described 109 in [G709-Amd3], and ODUflex being developed in [G709-v3]. 111 In addition, the following issues require consideration: 113 - Support for ODUflex resizing capabilities, potentially hitless 114 (similar to LCAS, as defined in [VCAT-LCAS]), which is under 115 discussion in ITU-T. 117 - Support for Tributary Port Number. The Tributary Port Number 118 has to be negotiated on each link for flexible assignment of 119 tributary ports to tributary slots in case of LO-ODU over HO- 120 ODU (e.g., ODU2 into ODU3). Alternatively, the nodes of the 121 network are supposed to run AutoMSI mode. 123 Therefore, it is clear that [RFC4328] has to be updated or replaced 124 in order to support ODUk multiplexing, as well as other ODU 125 enhancements introduced by evolution of OTN standards. 127 This document updates RFC4328 extending the G.709 ODUk traffic 128 parameters and also presents a new OTN label format which is very 129 flexible and scalable. 131 2. Terminology 133 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 134 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 135 document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. 137 3. GMPLS Extensions for the Evolutive G.709 - Overview 139 The new features for the evolutive OTN are described in the separate 140 ITU-T documents, for example, ODU0, ODU2e,ODU4 are described in 141 [G709-Amd3] and ODUflex is being developed in [G709-v3]. 143 The new signal types of digital wrapper layer for the evolutive OTN 144 are listed as follows: 146 - Optical Channel Transport Unit (OTUk): 147 . OTU4 149 - Optical Channel Data Unit (ODUk): 150 . ODU0 151 . ODU2e 152 . ODU4 153 . ODUflex 155 A new Tributary Slot (TS) granularity (i.e., 1.25 Gbps) is introduced 156 in [G709-Amd3]. At this point there are two TS granularities for the 157 original ODU1, ODU2, ODU3. The TS granularity at 2.5 Gbps is used on 158 legacy interfaces while the new 1.25 Gbps will be used for the new 159 interfaces. 161 New ITU-T documents not only introduce new signal types but also 162 define the new multiplexing hierarchy for the evolutive OTN. In 163 addition to the support of ODUk mapping into OTUk (k = 1, 2, 3, 4), 164 G.709 and its amendments, support ODUk multiplexing. For the 165 evolutive OTN, the multiplexing of ODUj (j = 0, 1, 2, 2e, 3, flex) 166 into an ODUk (k > j) signal can be depicted as follows: 168 - ODU0 into ODU1 multiplexing (with 1,25Gbps TS granularity) 170 - ODU0, ODU1, ODUflex into ODU2 multiplexing (with 1.25Gbps TS 171 granularity) 173 - ODU1 into ODU2 multiplexing (with 2.5Gbps TS granularity) 175 - ODU0, ODU1, ODU2, ODU2e and ODUflex into ODU3 multiplexing 176 (with 1.25Gbps TS granularity) 178 - ODU1, ODU2 into ODU3 multiplexing (with 2.5Gbps TS granularity) 180 - ODU0, ODU1, ODU2, ODU2e, ODU3 and ODUflex into ODU4 181 multiplexing (with 1.25Gbps TS granularity) 183 [RFC4328] describes GMPLS signaling extensions to support the control 184 for G.709 Optical Transport Networks (OTN) [ITUT-G709]. However, 185 [RFC4328] need to be updated because it does not provide the means to 186 signal all the new signal types and related mapping and multiplexing 187 functionalities. Moreover, it supports only the optional auto-MSI 188 mode which assumes that the Tributary Port Number is automatically 189 assigned in the transmit direction and not checked in the receive 190 direction. 192 This document extends the G.709 traffic parameters described in 193 [RFC4328] and also presents a new OTN label format which is very 194 flexible and scalable. 196 [Editors note] There are several possibilities to include the 197 Tributary Port Number information in the signaling. Note that ITU-T 198 has not yet given a clear interpretation of the Tributary Port number 199 information in case of bidirectional paths, so the adoption of any 200 solution should be kept on hold until ITU-T provides an approved 201 definition. 203 4. Extensions for Traffic Parameters for the Evolutive G.709 205 The traffic parameters for G.709 are defined as follows: 207 0 1 2 3 208 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 1 209 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 210 | Signal Type | Tolerance | NMC | 211 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 212 | NVC | Multiplier (MT) | 213 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 214 | Bit_Rate | 215 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 217 [Editors note] NMC field in RFC4328 had the meaning to indicate how 218 many labels have to be expected. This information allows the 219 protocol to operate without specific knowledge of the signal type. 220 The same effect could be obtained either indicating the bit map 221 length or indicating the number of labels. 223 The Signal Type should be extended to cover the new Signal Type 224 introduced by the evolutive OTN. The new Signal Type is extended as 225 follows: 227 Value Type 228 ----- ---- 229 0 Not significant 230 1 ODU1 (i.e., 2.5 Gbps) 231 2 ODU2 (i.e., 10 Gbps) 232 3 ODU3 (i.e., 40 Gbps) 233 4 ODU4 (i.e., 100 Gbps) 234 5 Reserved (for future use) 235 6 OCh at 2.5 Gbps 236 7 OCh at 10 Gbps 237 8 OCh at 40 Gbps 238 9 OCh at 100 Gbps 239 10~19 Reserved (for future use) 240 20 ODU0 (i.e., 1.25 Gbps) 241 21~30 Reserved (for future use) 242 31 ODU2e (i.e., 10Gbps for FC1200 and GE LAN) 243 32 ODUflex (i.e., 1.25*N Gbps) 244 33~255 Reserved (for future use) 246 In case of ODUflex(CBR), the Bit_Rate and Tolerance fields are used 247 together to represent the actual bandwidth of ODUflex, where: 249 - The Bit_Rate field indicates the nominal bit rate of ODUflex(CBR) 250 encoded as a 32-bit IEEE single-precision floating-point number 251 (referring to [RFC4506] and [IEEE]). 253 - The Tolerance field indicates the bit rate tolerance (part per 254 million, ppm) of the ODUflex(CBR) encoded as an unsigned integer. 256 For example, for an ODUflex(CBR) service with Bit_Rate = 2.5Gbps and 257 Tolerance = 50ppm, the actual bandwidth of the ODUflex is: 259 2.5Gbps * (1 - 50ppm) ~ 2.5Gbps * (1 + 50ppm) 261 In case of other ODUk signal types, the Bit_Rate and Tolerance fields 262 are not necessary and MUST be filled with 0. 264 4.1. Usage of ODUflex traffic parameter 266 In case of ODUflex(CBR), the information of Bit_Rate and Tolerance in 267 the ODUflex traffic parameter is used to determine the total number 268 of tributary slots N in the HO ODUk link to be reserved. Here: 270 N = Ceiling of 272 ODUflex(CBR) nominal bit rate * (1 + ODUflex(CBR) bit rate tolerance) 273 --------------------------------------------------------------------- 274 ODTUk.ts nominal bit rate * (1 - HO OPUk bit rate tolerance) 276 Therefore, a node receiving a Path message containing ODUflex(CBR) 277 traffic parameter can allocate precise number of tributary slots and 278 set up the cross-connection for the ODUflex service. 280 The table below shows the actual bandwidth of the tributary slot of 281 ODUk (in Gbps), referring to [G709-v3]. 283 ODUk Minimum Nominal Maximum 284 ------------------------------------------------------- 285 ODU2 1.249 384 632 1.249 409 620 1.249 434 608 286 ODU3 1.254 678 635 1.254 703 729 1.254 728 823 287 ODU4 1.301 683 217 1.301 709 251 1.301 735 285 289 Note that: 291 Minimum bandwidth of ODUTk.ts = 292 ODTUk.ts nominal bit rate * (1 - HO OPUk bit rate tolerance) 294 Maximum bandwidth of ODTUk.ts = 295 ODTUk.ts nominal bit rate * (1 + HO OPUk bit rate tolerance) 297 Where: HO OPUk bit rate tolerance = 20ppm 299 For different ODUk, the bandwidths of the tributary slot are 300 different, and so the total number of tributary slots to be reserved 301 for the ODUflex(CBR) may not be the same on different HO ODUk links. 302 This is why the traffic parameter should bring the actual bandwidth 303 information other than the NMC field. 305 In case of ODUflex(GFP), the total number of tributary slots to be 306 reserved for one ODUflex service MUST keep the same in different HO 307 ODUk links. So the NMC field can be used to indicate the total number 308 of TS, instead of using the Bit_Rate and Tolerance fields. Therefore, 309 when Signal Type = ODUflex(32), the zero value of NMC field and 310 nonzero values of Bit_Rate and Tolerance fields imply an ODUflex(CBR) 311 traffic parameter, and the nonzero value of NMC field and zero values 312 of Bit_Rate and Tolerance fields imply an ODUflex(GFP) traffic 313 parameter. 315 4.2. Example of ODUflex traffic parameter 317 This section gives an example to illustrate the usage of ODUflex(CBR) 318 traffic parameter. 320 Assume there is an ODUflex(CBR) service requesting a bandwidth of 321 (2.5Gbps, +/-20ppm) from node A to node C. In other words, the 322 ODUflex traffic parameter indicates that Signal Type is 32 (ODUflex), 323 Bit_Rate is 2.5Gbps and Tolerance is 20ppm. 325 +-----+ +---------+ +-----+ 326 | +-------------+ +-----+ +-------------+ | 327 | ===============\| ODU |/=============== | 328 | ===============/| flex+-=============== | 329 | +-------------+ | |\=============== | 330 | +-------------+ +-----+ +-------------+ | 331 | | | | | | 332 | | ....... | | ....... | | 333 | A +-------------+ B +-------------+ C | 334 +-----+ HO ODU4 +---------+ HO ODU2 +-----+ 336 =========: TS occupied by ODUflex 337 ---------: free TS 339 - On the HO ODU4 link between node A and B: 341 The maximum bandwidth of the ODUflex equals 2.5Gbps * (1 + 20ppm), 342 and the minimum bandwidth of the tributary slot of ODU4 equals 343 1.301 683 217Gbps, so the total number of tributary slots N1 to 344 be reserved on this link is: 346 N1 = ceiling (2.5Gbps * (1 + 20ppm) / 1.301 683 217) = 2 348 - On the HO ODU2 link between node B and C: 350 The maximum bandwidth of the ODUflex equals 2.5Gbps * (1 + 20ppm), 351 and the minimum bandwidth of the tributary slot of ODU2 equals 352 1.249 384 632Gbps, so the total number of tributary slots N2 to 353 be reserved on this link is: 355 N2 = ceiling (2.5Gbps * (1 + 20ppm) / 1.249 384 632) = 3 357 5. Generalized Label 359 [RFC3471] has defined the Generalized Label which extends the 360 traditional label by allowing the representation of not only labels 361 which travel in-band with associated data packets, but also labels 362 which identify time-slots, wavelengths, or space division multiplexed 363 positions. The format of the corresponding RSVP-TE Generalized Label 364 object is defined in the Section 2.3 of [RFC3473]. 366 However, for different technologies, we usually need use specific 367 label rather than the Generalized Label. For example, the label 368 format described in [RFC4606] could be used for SDH/SONET, the label 369 format in [RFC4328] for G.709. 371 According to the ODUk label format defined in [RFC4328], it could be 372 updated to support new signal types defined in G.709 amendment 3 but 373 would hardly be further enhanced to support possible new signal types. 374 Furthermore such label format can face big problems related to 375 scalability matters due to the high number of labels needed. For 376 example, when ODU3 is mapped into ODU4 with 1.25G tributary slots, it 377 will need thirty-one labels (31*4*8=992 bits) to be allocated for one 378 ODU3 connection. If ODUflex into ODU4, it may need up to eighty 379 labels (80*4*8=2560 bits) to be allocated for one ODUflex connection. 381 In this document, a new ODUk label format is defined. The new ODUk 382 label format is very flexible and scalable. 384 5.1. New definition of ODUk label 386 In order to be compatible with new types of ODU signal and new types 387 of tributary slot, the following new ODUk label format is defined: 389 0 1 2 3 390 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 1 391 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 392 | ODUj |OD(T)Uk| T | Reserved | Bit Map | 393 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 394 | ......... | 395 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 397 ODUj and OD(T)Uk (4 bits respectively): indicate that LO ODUj is 398 multiplexed into HO ODUk(k>j), or LO ODUj is mapped into OTUk (j=k). 400 ODUj field Signal type 401 ---------- ----------- 402 0 LO ODU0 403 1 LO ODU1 404 2 LO ODU2 405 3 LO ODU3 406 4 LO ODU4 407 5 LO ODU2e 408 6 LO ODUflex 409 7-15 Reserved (for future use) 411 OD(T)Uk field Signal type 412 ------------- ----------- 413 0 Reserved (for future use) 414 1 HO ODU1 / OTU1 415 2 HO ODU2 / OTU2 416 3 HO ODU3 / OTU3 417 4 HO ODU4 / OTU4 418 5-15 Reserved (for future use) 420 T (2 bits): indicates the type of tributary slot of HO ODUk. 421 Currently, two types of tributary slot are defined in [G.709], the 422 1.25Gbps tributary slot and the 2.5Gbps tributary slot. 424 T field TS type 425 ------- ------- 426 0 1.25Gbps TS granularity 427 1 2.5Gbps TS granularity 428 2-3 Reserved (for future use) 430 Bit Map (variable): indicates which tributary slots in HO ODUk that 431 the LO ODUj will be multiplexed into. The sequence of the Bit Map is 432 consistent with the sequence of the tributary slots in HO ODUk. Each 433 bit in the bit map represents the corresponding tributary slot in HO 434 ODUk with a value of 1 or 0 indicating whether the tributary slot 435 will be used by LO ODUj or not. 437 The size of the bit map equals to the total number of the tributary 438 slots of HO ODUk. 440 In case of an ODUk mapped into OTUk, it's no need to indicate which 441 tributary slots will be used, so the size of Bit Map is 0. 443 Padded bits are added behind the Bit Map to make the whole label a 444 multiple of four bytes if necessary. Padded bit MUST be set to 0 and 445 MUST be ignored. 447 [Editors note] Tributary Port Number information to be inserted as 448 soon as clarification from ITU has been provided. 450 5.2. Examples 452 The following examples are given in order to illustrate the label 453 format described in the previous sections of this document. 455 (1) ODUk into OTUk mapping: 457 In such conditions, the downstream node along an LSP returns a label 458 indicating that the ODU1 (ODU2 or ODU3 or ODU4) is directly mapped 459 into the corresponding OTU1 (OTU2 or OTU3 or ODU4). The following 460 example label indicates an ODU1 mapped into OTU1. 462 0 1 2 3 463 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 1 464 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 465 |0 0 0 1|0 0 0 1|0 1| Reserved | Padded Bits (0) | 466 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 468 (2) ODUj into ODUk multiplexing: 470 In such conditions, this label indicates that an ODUj is multiplexed 471 into several tributary slots of OPUk and then mapped into OTUk. Some 472 instances are shown as follow: 474 - ODU0 into ODU2 Multiplexing: 476 0 1 2 3 477 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 1 478 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 479 |0 0 0 0|0 0 1 0|0 0| Reserved |0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0|Padded Bits (0)| 480 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 482 This above label indicates an ODU0 multiplexed into the second 483 tributary slot of ODU2, wherein the type of the tributary slot is 484 1.25Gbps. 486 - ODU1 into ODU2 Multiplexing with 1.25Gbps TS granularity: 488 0 1 2 3 489 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 1 490 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 491 |0 0 0 1|0 0 1 0|0 0| Reserved |0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0|Padded Bits (0)| 492 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 494 This above label indicates an ODU1 multiplexed into the 2nd and the 495 4th tributary slot of ODU2, wherein the type of the tributary slot is 496 1.25Gbps. 498 - ODU2 into ODU3 Multiplexing with 2.5Gbps TS granularity: 500 0 1 2 3 501 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 1 502 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 503 |0 0 1 0|0 0 1 1|0 1| Reserved |0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0| 504 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 506 This above label indicates an ODU2 multiplexed into the 2nd, 3rd, 5th 507 and 7th tributary slot of ODU3, wherein the type of the tributary 508 slot is 2.5Gbps. 510 5.3. Label Distribution Procedure 512 This document does not change the existing label distribution 513 procedures [RFC4328] for GMPLS except that the new ODUk label should 514 be processed as follows. 516 When a node receives a generalized label request for setting up an 517 ODUj LSP from its upstream node, the node should generate an ODU 518 label according to the signal type of the requested LSP and the free 519 resources (i.e., free tributary slots of ODUk) that will be reserved 520 for the LSP, and send the label to its upstream node. Note that these 521 labels can also be specified by the source node of the connection. 523 In case of ODUj to ODUk multiplexing, the node should firstly 524 determine the size of the Bit Map field according to the signal type 525 and the tributary slot type of ODUk, and then set the bits to 1 in 526 the Bit Map field corresponding to the reserved tributary slots. 528 In case of ODUk to OTUk mapping, the node only needs to fill the ODUj 529 and the ODUk fields with corresponding values in the label. Other 530 bits are reserved and MUST be set to 0. 532 When receiving an ODU label from its downstream node, the node should 533 learn which ODU signal type is multiplexed or mapped into which ODU 534 signal type by analyzing the ODUj and the ODUk fields. 536 In case of ODUj to ODUk multiplexing, the node should firstly 537 determine the size of the Bit Map field according to the signal type 538 and the tributary slot type of ODUk, and then obtain which tributary 539 slots in ODUk are reserved by its downstream node according to the 540 position of the bits that are set to 1 in the Bit Map field, so that 541 the node can multiplex the ODUj into the reserved tributary slots of 542 ODUk after the LSP is established. 544 In case of ODUk to OTUk mapping, the size of Bit Map field is 0 and 545 no additional procedure is needed. 547 5.4. Backward Compatibility Considerations 549 5.4.1. Control Plane Backward Compatibility Considerations 551 Since the [RFC4328] has been deployed in the network for the nodes 552 which support the [ITUT-G709] (herein we call them "old nodes"), the 553 backward compatibility SHOULD be take into consideration when the new 554 nodes (i.e., nodes that support the [G709-Amd3] or [G709-v3]) and the 555 old nodes are interworking. 557 For backward compatibility consideration, the new node SHOULD have 558 the ability to generate and parse old labels. 560 o For the old node, it always generates and sends old label to its 561 upstream node, no matter the upstream node is new or old, as 562 described in [RFC4328]. 564 o For the new node, it will generate and send old label if its 565 upstream node is an old one, and generate and send new label if 566 its upstream node is a new one. 568 One backward compatibility example is shown below: 570 Path Path Path Path 571 +-----+ ----> +-----+ ----> +-----+ ----> +-----+ ----> +-----+ 572 | | | | | | | | | | 573 | A +-------+ B +-------+ C +-------+ D +-------+ E | 574 |(new)| |(new)| |(old)| |(old)| |(new)| 575 +-----+ <---- +-----+ <---- +-----+ <---- +-----+ <---- +-----+ 576 Resv Resv Resv Resv 577 (new label) (old label) (old label) (old label) 579 As described above, for backward compatibility considerations, it is 580 necessary for a new node to know whether the neighbor node is new or 581 old. 583 One optional method is manual configuration. But it is recommended to 584 use LMP to discover the capability of the neighbor node automatically, 585 as described in [OTN-LMP]. 587 When performing the HO ODU link capability negotiation: 589 o If the neighbor node only support the 2.5Gbps TS and only support 590 ODU1/ODU2/ODU3, the neighbor node should be treated as an old node. 592 o If the neighbor node can support the 1.25Gbps TS, or can support 593 other LO ODU types defined in [G709-Amd3] or [G709-v3]), the 594 neighbor node should be treated as new node. 596 o If the neighbor node returns a LinkSummaryNack message including 597 an ERROR_CODE indicating nonsupport of HO ODU link capability 598 negotiation, the neighbor node should be treated as an old node. 600 5.4.2. Data Plane Backward Compatibility Considerations 602 As described in chapter 3.1 and 4.1 of [OTN-LMP], the node supporting 603 1.25Gbps TS can interwork with the other nodes that supporting 604 2.5Gbps TS by combining Specific TSs together in data plane. The 605 control plane MUST support this TS combination. 607 Take the following figure as an example. Assume that there is an ODU2 608 link between node A and B, where node A only supports the 2.5Gbps TS 609 while node B supports the 1.25Gbps TS. In this case, the TS#i and 610 TS#i+4 (where i<=4) of node B are combined together. When creating an 611 ODU1 service in this ODU2 link, node B reserves the TS#i and TS#i+4 612 with the granularity of 1.25Gbps. But in the label sent from B to A, 613 it is indicated that the TS#i with the granularity of 2.5Gbps is 614 reserved. 616 Path 617 +----------+ ------------> +----------+ 618 | TS1==|===========\--------+--TS1 | 619 | TS2==|=========\--\-------+--TS2 | 620 | TS3==|=======\--\--\------+--TS3 | 621 | TS4==|=====\--\--\--\-----+--TS4 | 622 | | \ \ \ \----+--TS5 | 623 | | \ \ \------+--TS6 | 624 | | \ \--------+--TS7 | 625 | | \----------+--TS8 | 626 +----------+ <------------ +----------+ 627 node A Resv node B 629 In the contrary direction, when receiving a label from node A 630 indicating that the TS#i with the granularity of 2.5Gbps is reserved, 631 node B will reserved the TS#i and TS#i+4 with the granularity of 632 1.25Gbps in its control plane. 634 5.5. Collision management 636 [Editors note] This chapter should indicate the procedure in case of 637 collision between Tributary Port Numbers and/or Tributary Slots e.g. 638 two different LSP setups may choose a disjoint set of Tributary Slots 639 but they may request the same Tributary Port Number value (same MSI 640 in G.709 OPUk field). 642 In this case the first signaling should be successful and the second 643 one must fail. 645 6. Security Considerations 647 TBD. 649 7. IANA Considerations 651 TBD. 653 8. References 655 8.1. Normative References 657 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 658 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 660 [RFC4328] D. Papadimitriou, Ed. "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label 661 Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Extensions for G.709 Optical 662 Transport Networks Control", RFC 4328, Jan 2006. 664 [RFC3471] Berger, L., Editor, "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label 665 Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Functional Description", RFC 666 3471, January 2003. 668 [RFC3473] L. Berger, Ed., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching 669 (GMPLS) Signaling Resource ReserVation Protocol-Traffic 670 Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions", RFC 3473, January 2003. 672 [RFC3945] Mannie, E., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching 673 (GMPLS) Architecture", RFC 3945, October 2004. 675 [VCAT-LCAS] G. Bernstein, Ed., "Operating Virtual Concatenation (VCAT) 676 and the Link Capacity Adjustment Scheme (LCAS) with 677 Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)", draft- 678 bernstein-ccamp-gmpls-vcat-lcas, July 29, 2009. 680 [OTN-LMP] Fatai Zhang, Ed., "Link Management Protocol (LMP) 681 extensions for G.709 Optical Transport Networks", draft- 682 zhang-ccamp-gmpls-g.709-lmp-discovery-02.txt, Oct 21, 2009. 684 8.2. Informative References 686 [ITUT-G709] ITU-T, "Interface for the Optical Transport Network 687 (OTN)," G.709 Recommendation (and Amendment 1), February 688 2001 (October 2001). 690 [G709-Amd3] ITU-T, "Interface for the Optical Transport Network 691 (OTN)," G.709 Recommendation Amendment3), December 2008. 693 [G709-v3] ITU-T, "Interfaces for the Optical Transport Network (OTN) 694 ", G.709/Y.1331, December 2009. 696 [RFC4506] M. Eisler, Ed., "XDR: External Data Representation 697 Standard", RFC 4506, May 2006. 699 [IEEE] "IEEE Standard for Binary Floating-Point Arithmetic", 700 ANSI/IEEE Standard 754-1985, Institute of Electrical and 701 Electronics Engineers, August 1985. 703 9. Authors' Addresses 705 Fatai Zhang 706 Huawei Technologies 707 F3-5-B R&D Center, Huawei Base 708 Bantian, Longgang District 709 Shenzhen 518129 P.R.China 710 Phone: +86-755-28972912 711 Email: zhangfatai@huawei.com 713 Guoying Zhang 714 China Academy of Telecommunication Research of MII 715 11 Yue Tan Nan Jie Beijing, P.R.China 716 Phone: +86-10-68094272 717 Email: zhangguoying@mail.ritt.com.cn 719 Sergio Belotti 720 Alcatel-Lucent 721 Optics CTO 722 Via Trento 30 20059 Vimercate (Milano) Italy 723 +39 039 6863033 724 Email: sergio.belotti@alcatel-lucent.it 726 Daniele Ceccarelli 727 Ericsson 728 Via A. Negrone 1/A 729 Genova - Sestri Ponente 730 Italy 731 Email: daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com 733 Yi Lin 734 Huawei Technologies 735 F3-5-B R&D Center, Huawei Base 736 Bantian, Longgang District 737 Shenzhen 518129 P.R.China 738 Phone: +86-755-28972914 739 Email: linyi_hw@huawei.com 740 Yunbin Xu 741 China Academy of Telecommunication Research of MII 742 11 Yue Tan Nan Jie Beijing, P.R.China 743 Phone: +86-10-68094134 744 Email: xuyunbin@mail.ritt.com.cn 746 Pietro Grandi 747 Alcatel-Lucent 748 Optics CTO 749 Via Trento 30 20059 Vimercate (Milano) Italy 750 +39 039 6864930 751 Email: pietro_vittorio.grandi@alcatel-lucent.it 753 Diego Caviglia 754 Ericsson 755 Via A. Negrone 1/A 756 Genova - Sestri Ponente 757 Italy 758 Email: diego.caviglia@ericsson.com 760 Acknowledgment 762 TBD. 764 Intellectual Property 766 The IETF Trust takes no position regarding the validity or scope of 767 any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be 768 claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology 769 described in any IETF Document or the extent to which any license 770 under such rights might or might not be available; nor does it 771 represent that it has made any independent effort to identify any 772 such rights. 774 Copies of Intellectual Property disclosures made to the IETF 775 Secretariat and any assurances of licenses to be made available, or 776 the result of an attempt made to obtain a general license or 777 permission for the use of such proprietary rights by implementers or 778 users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR 779 repository at http://www.ietf.org/ipr 781 The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any 782 copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary 783 rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement 784 any standard or specification contained in an IETF Document. Please 785 address the information to the IETF at ietf-ipr@ietf.org. 787 The definitive version of an IETF Document is that published by, or 788 under the auspices of, the IETF. Versions of IETF Documents that are 789 published by third parties, including those that are translated into 790 other languages, should not be considered to be definitive versions 791 of IETF Documents. The definitive version of these Legal Provisions 792 is that published by, or under the auspices of, the IETF. Versions of 793 these Legal Provisions that are published by third parties, including 794 those that are translated into other languages, should not be 795 considered to be definitive versions of these Legal Provisions. 797 For the avoidance of doubt, each Contributor to the IETF Standards 798 Process licenses each Contribution that he or she makes as part of 799 the IETF Standards Process to the IETF Trust pursuant to the 800 provisions of RFC 5378. No language to the contrary, or terms, 801 conditions or rights that differ from or are inconsistent with the 802 rights and licenses granted under RFC 5378, shall have any effect and 803 shall be null and void, whether published or posted by such 804 Contributor, or included with or in such Contribution. 806 Disclaimer of Validity 808 All IETF Documents and the information contained therein are provided 809 on an "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE 810 REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE 811 IETF TRUST AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL 812 WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY 813 WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION THEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE 814 ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS 815 FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. 817 Copyright Notice 819 Copyright (c) 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 820 document authors. All rights reserved. 822 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 823 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 824 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 825 publication of this document. Please review these documents 826 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with 827 respect to this document.