idnits 2.17.1 draft-zhang-ccamp-gmpls-evolving-g709-08.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 : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** There are 8 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 == Line 889 has weird spacing: '...in case the s...' -- The document date (July 8, 2011) is 4673 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 173, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'OTN-V3' is mentioned on line 179, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'R1' is mentioned on line 200, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'R2' is mentioned on line 210, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'R3' is mentioned on line 258, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'R4' is mentioned on line 285, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'R5' is mentioned on line 307, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'R6' is mentioned on line 315, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'RFC-4003' is mentioned on line 319, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'RFC4606' is mentioned on line 482, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'RFC 6107' is mentioned on line 485, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'OTN-FRWK' is mentioned on line 782, but not defined == Unused Reference: 'OTN-info' is defined on line 1419, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'G709-V2' is defined on line 1436, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'G798-V2' is defined on line 1439, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'G798-V3' is defined on line 1443, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Outdated reference: A later version (-15) exists of draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g709-framework-04 ** Downref: Normative reference to an Informational draft: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g709-framework (ref. 'OTN-frwk') == Outdated reference: A later version (-13) exists of draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-g709-info-model-00 ** Downref: Normative reference to an Informational draft: draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-g709-info-model (ref. 'OTN-info') -- No information found for draft-zhang-ccamp-gmpls-g - is the name correct? -- Possible downref: Normative reference to a draft: ref. 'OTN-LMP' -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'G709-V3' Summary: 3 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 20 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 Khuzema Pithewan 10 Infinera 11 Expires: January 8, 2012 July 8, 2011 13 Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling 14 Extensions for the evolving G.709 Optical Transport Networks Control 16 draft-zhang-ccamp-gmpls-evolving-g709-08.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 January 8, 2012. 41 Abstract 43 Recent progress in ITU-T Recommendation G.709 standardization has 44 introduced new ODU containers (ODU0, ODU4, ODU2e and ODUflex) and 45 enhanced Optical Transport Networking (OTN) flexibility. Several 46 recent documents have proposed ways to modify GMPLS signaling 47 protocols to support these new OTN features. 49 It is important that a single solution is developed for use in GMPLS 50 signaling and routing protocols. This solution must support ODUk 51 multiplexing capabilities, address all of the new features, be 52 acceptable to all equipment vendors, and be extensible considering 53 continued OTN evolution. 55 This document describes the extensions to the Generalized Multi- 56 Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) signaling to control the evolving 57 Optical Transport Networks (OTN) addressing ODUk multiplexing and new 58 features including ODU0, ODU4, ODU2e and ODUflex. 60 Conventions used in this document 62 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 63 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 64 document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. 66 Table of Contents 68 1. Introduction .................................................. 3 69 2. Terminology ................................................... 4 70 3. GMPLS Extensions for the Evolving G.709 - Overview ............ 4 71 3.1. Requirements for supporting services over hierarchical OTN 72 network ....................................................... 5 73 4. Extensions for Traffic Parameters for the Evolving G.709 ...... 8 74 4.1. Usage of ODUflex(CBR) Traffic Parameter .................. 9 75 4.2. Example of ODUflex(CBR) Traffic Parameter ............... 10 76 5. Generalized Label ............................................ 11 77 5.1. New definition of Single-stage ODUk Generalized Label ... 11 78 5.1.1. Examples ........................................... 14 79 5.1.2. Label Distribution Procedure ....................... 16 80 5.1.2.1. Notification on Label Error ................... 17 81 5.1.3. Supporting Virtual Concatenation and Multiplication. 17 82 5.1.4. Supporting Multiplexing Hierarchy .................. 18 83 5.1.5. Supporting One-hop Multiplexing Hierarchy via Single 84 Session ................................................... 19 85 5.1.5.1. Multiplexing Hierarchy and Solution Alternatives19 86 5.1.5.2. Multi Stage Label Format ...................... 19 87 5.1.5.3. Label format for NVC or Multiplier > 1 ........ 20 88 5.1.5.4. Usage of Multi-stage Label in Multi Stage Muxing21 89 5.2. New definition of Multi-stage ODUk Generalized Label .... 22 90 5.2.1. Multi-stage Label .................................. 23 91 5.2.2. Label format for NVC or Multiplier > 1 ............. 24 92 5.2.3. Usage of Multi-stage Label ......................... 24 93 5.2.4. Label Distribution Rules ........................... 26 94 5.2.5. Examples ........................................... 27 95 5.3. Control Plane Backward Compatibility Considerations ..... 29 96 6. Security Considerations ...................................... 30 97 7. IANA Considerations .......................................... 30 98 8. References ................................................... 31 99 8.1. Normative References .................................... 31 100 8.2. Informative References .................................. 32 101 9. Authors' Addresses ........................................... 33 102 Acknowledgment .................................................. 35 104 1. Introduction 106 Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) [RFC3945] extends 107 MPLS to include Layer-2 Switching (L2SC), Time-Division Multiplex 108 (e.g., SONET/SDH, PDH, and ODU), Wavelength (OCh, Lambdas) Switching, 109 and Spatial Switching (e.g., incoming port or fiber to outgoing port 110 or fiber). [RFC3471] presents a functional description of the 111 extensions to Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) signaling 112 required to support Generalized MPLS. RSVP-TE-specific formats and 113 mechanisms and technology specific details are defined in [RFC3473]. 115 With the evolution and deployment of G.709 technology, it is 116 necessary that appropriate enhanced control technology support be 117 provided for G.709. [RFC4328] describes the control technology 118 details that are specific to foundation G.709 Optical Transport 119 Networks (OTN), as specified in the ITU-T Recommendation G.709 [G709- 120 V1], for ODUk deployments without multiplexing. 122 In addition to increasing need to support ODUk multiplexing, the 123 evolution of OTN has introduced additional containers and new 124 flexibility. For example, ODU0, ODU2e, ODU4 containers and ODUflex 125 are developed in [G709-V3]. 127 In addition, the following issues require consideration: 129 - Support for hitless adjustment of ODUflex, which is to be 130 specified in ITU-T G.hao. 132 - Support for Tributary Port Number. The Tributary Port Number 133 has to be negotiated on each link for flexible assignment of 134 tributary ports to tributary slots in case of LO-ODU over HO- 135 ODU (e.g., ODU2 into ODU3). 137 Therefore, it is clear that [RFC4328] has to be updated or superceded 138 in order to support ODUk multiplexing, as well as other ODU 139 enhancements introduced by evolution of OTN standards. 141 This document updates [RFC4328] extending the G.709 ODUk traffic 142 parameters and also presents a new OTN label format which is very 143 flexible and scalable. 145 2. Terminology 147 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 148 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 149 document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. 151 3. GMPLS Extensions for the Evolving G.709 - Overview 153 New features for the evolving OTN, for example, new ODU0, ODU2e, ODU4 154 and ODUflex containers are specified in [G709-V3]. The corresponding 155 new signal types are summarized below: 157 - Optical Channel Transport Unit (OTUk): 158 . OTU4 160 - Optical Channel Data Unit (ODUk): 161 . ODU0 162 . ODU2e 163 . ODU4 164 . ODUflex 166 A new Tributary Slot (TS) granularity (i.e., 1.25 Gbps) is also 167 described in [G709-V3]. Thus, there are now two TS granularities for 168 the foundation OTN ODU1, ODU2 and ODU3 containers. The TS granularity 169 at 2.5 Gbps is used on legacy interfaces while the new 1.25 Gbps will 170 be used for the new interfaces. 172 In addition to the support of ODUk mapping into OTUk (k = 1, 2, 3, 4), 173 the evolving OTN [G.709-V3] encompasses the multiplexing of ODUj (j = 174 0, 1, 2, 2e, 3, flex) into an ODUk (k > j), as described in Section 175 3.1.2 of [OTN-frwk]. 177 Virtual Concatenation (VCAT) of OPUk (OPUk-Xv, k = 1/2/3, X = 1...256) 178 are also supported by [OTN-V3]. Note that VCAT of OPU0 / OPU2e / OPU4 179 / OPUflex are not supported per [OTN-V3]. 181 [RFC4328] describes GMPLS signaling extensions to support the control 182 for G.709 Optical Transport Networks (OTN) [G709-V1]. However, 183 [RFC4328] needs to be updated because it does not provide the means 184 to signal all the new signal types and related mapping and 185 multiplexing functionalities. Moreover, it supports only the 186 deprecated auto-MSI mode which assumes that the Tributary Port Number 187 is automatically assigned in the transmit direction and not checked 188 in the receive direction. 190 This document extends the G.709 traffic parameters described in 191 [RFC4328] and presents a new OTN label format which is very flexible 192 and scalable. Additionally, procedures about Tributary Port Number 193 assignment through control plane are also provided in this document. 195 3.1. Requirements for supporting services over hierarchical OTN network 197 [Editor's Note] The section 3.1 about requirements will be moved to 198 the framework document after discussion. 200 1.[R1] Support signaling mechanism to instantiate ODUj service layer 201 on an ODUk link via single stage muxing. 203 An ODUj LSP could involve zero (j=k) or one stage (j| 216 | | | | 217 | |<----- ODU2 Connection ----->| | 218 | | | | 219 +--+ +--+ +--+ +--+ +--+ +--+ 220 |N1+------+N2+======+N3+======+N4+======+N5+------+N6| 221 +--+ ODU3 +--+ ODU3 +--+ ODU4 +--+ ODU3 +--+ ODU3 +--+ 222 link link link link link 224 Figure 1 - Requirement 2 226 Figure 1 shows an example where the ODU0 LSP is multiplexed into an 227 intermediate ODU2, which crosses three ODU links between N2 and N5. 229 There are two typical scenarios requesting two or more stage 230 multiplexing crossing multiple ODUk links: 232 - Tunnel scenario: Assume that N3 and N4 in figure 1 are legacy 233 nodes which don't support ODU0 or ODUflex cross-connection. In 234 order to create ODU0 or ODUflex service between N1 and N6, an 235 intermediate ODU2 connection can be created between N2 and N5. 236 Then, the ODU0 or ODUflex can be multiplexed into this ODU2 237 connection. In this case, N3 and N4 only need to perform ODU2 238 cross-connection and are not aware of ODU0 or ODUflex service 239 inside. 241 - Carrier-in-carrier scenario: Assume that N2, N3, N4 and N5 in 242 figure 1 belong to carrier A, while N1 and N6 belong to carrier 243 B. Carrier B may lease an ODU2 pipe between N2 and N5, which is 244 pre-provisioned by carrier A, to carry LO ODU services between 245 N1 and N6. 247 More specifically, this requirement can be further divided into two 248 items: 250 [R2.1] Support signaling mechanism to trigger the creation of one 251 or more intermediate ODU layers over multiple ODUk links based on 252 the ODUj LSP creation request. 254 [R2.2] Support signaling mechanism to instantiate ODUj service 255 layer on multiple ODUk links where one or more intermediate ODU 256 layers may be pre-existing. 258 3.[R3] Support signaling mechanism to instantiate ODUj LSP involving 259 one or more intermediate ODU layers (either pre-existing or not) on 260 one hop ODUk link. 262 More specifically, this requirement can be further divided into two 263 items: 265 [R3.1] Support signaling mechanism to instantiate one or more 266 intermediate layers on one hop ODUk link in order to support the 267 ODUj service layer. 269 An ODUj LSP could involve two or more stage multiplexing on a given 270 ODUk link. These intermediate layers may be implicitly created as a 271 part of ODUj service LSP creation. In this case, both control plane 272 and data plane entities will be created for the ODUj service layer. 273 However, intermediate ODU layer(s) (implicitly created) will have 274 data plane representation only. 276 [R3.2] Support signaling mechanism to instantiate ODUj service 277 layer on an ODUk link where one or more intermediate ODU layers may 278 be pre-existing. 280 An ODUj LSP could involve two or more stage multiplexing on a given 281 ODUk link. These intermediate layers may be pre-existing as a 282 result of another LSP creation on the same ODU hierarchy or 283 explicitly configured through management interface. 285 4.[R4] Support controllable and manageable capability for the 286 intermediate ODU layers which cross one or more hops of ODUk links 287 and which is used for carrying ODUj services. 289 Once the intermediate ODU layers are created by control plane (may 290 be triggered by the ODUj service or by management plane), they 291 should be under the control of control plane or management plane. 292 The following typical scenarios should be considered: 294 - The control/management plane should have the capability to 295 reroute the intermediate ODU layers to recover all the contained 296 ODUj layer services to improve the recovery performance after 297 network failure occurs in the intermediate ODU layers. 299 - The control/management plane should have the capability to 300 delete an empty intermediate ODU connection (i.e., without any 301 ODUj service inside it) to release the bandwidth resource of 302 ODUk link. For example, the management plane may request the 303 control plane to delete an empty intermediate ODU2 in an ODU4 304 link so that the ODU4 link has enough bandwidth resource to 305 carry a new ODU3 service. 307 5.[R5] Support signaling mechanism where ODUj service LSP creation 308 may involve varying mux hierarchies on each hop. 310 An end-to-end ODUj service LSP creation may involve zero or more 311 stage ODU multiplexing on every hop in the path. Basically, the 312 scenarios discussed in R1 to R3 could be associated with any of the 313 hops involved. 315 6.[R6] Support signaling mechanism for egress control of OTN 316 interfaces. 318 An egress interface of an ODUj LSP could involve single or multiple 319 stage multiplexing. Egress Label sub-object defined in [RFC-4003] 320 must be used to signal hierarchical multiplexing information 321 pertaining to the egress interface of the LSP. 323 4. Extensions for Traffic Parameters for the Evolving G.709 325 The traffic parameters for G.709 are defined as follows: 327 0 1 2 3 328 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 1 329 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 330 | Signal Type | Tolerance | NMC | 331 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 332 | NVC | Multiplier (MT) | 333 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 334 | Bit_Rate | 335 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 337 The Signal Type should be extended to cover the new Signal Type 338 introduced by the evolving OTN. The new Signal Type is extended as 339 follows: 341 Value Type 342 ----- ---- 343 0 Not significant 344 1 ODU1 (i.e., 2.5 Gbps) 345 2 ODU2 (i.e., 10 Gbps) 346 3 ODU3 (i.e., 40 Gbps) 347 4 ODU4 (i.e., 100 Gbps) 348 5 Reserved (for future use) 349 6 OCh at 2.5 Gbps 350 7 OCh at 10 Gbps 351 8 OCh at 40 Gbps 352 9 OCh at 100 Gbps 353 10 ODU0 (i.e., 1.25 Gbps) 354 11 ODU2e (i.e., 10Gbps for FC1200 and GE LAN) 355 12~19 Reserved (for future use) 356 20 ODUflex(CBR) (i.e., 1.25*N Gbps) 357 21 ODUflex(GFP-F), resizable (i.e., 1.25*N Gbps) 358 22 ODUflex(GFP-F), non resizable (i.e., 1.25*N Gbps) 359 23~255 Reserved (for future use) 361 In case of ODUflex(CBR), the Bit_Rate and Tolerance fields are used 362 together to represent the actual bandwidth of ODUflex, where: 364 - The Bit_Rate field indicates the nominal bit rate of ODUflex(CBR) 365 encoded as a 32-bit IEEE single-precision floating-point number 366 (referring to [RFC4506] and [IEEE]). 368 - The Tolerance field indicates the bit rate tolerance (part per 369 million, ppm) of the ODUflex(CBR) encoded as an unsigned integer, 370 which is bounded in 0~100ppm. 372 For example, for an ODUflex(CBR) service with Bit_Rate = 2.5Gbps and 373 Tolerance = 100ppm, the actual bandwidth of the ODUflex is: 375 2.5Gbps * (1 - 100ppm) ~ 2.5Gbps * (1 + 100ppm) 377 In case of other ODUk signal types, the Bit_Rate and Tolerance fields 378 are not necessary and MUST be filled with 0. 380 The usage of the NMC, NVC and Multiplier (MT) fields are the same as 381 [RFC4328]. 383 4.1. Usage of ODUflex(CBR) Traffic Parameter 385 In case of ODUflex(CBR), the information of Bit_Rate and Tolerance in 386 the ODUflex traffic parameter is used to determine the total number 387 of tributary slots N in the HO ODUk link to be reserved. Here: 389 N = Ceiling of 391 ODUflex(CBR) nominal bit rate * (1 + ODUflex(CBR) bit rate tolerance) 392 --------------------------------------------------------------------- 393 ODTUk.ts nominal bit rate * (1 - HO OPUk bit rate tolerance) 395 Therefore, a node receiving a Path message containing ODUflex(CBR) 396 traffic parameter can allocate precise number of tributary slots and 397 set up the cross-connection for the ODUflex service. 399 Table 1 below shows the actual bandwidth of the tributary slot of 400 ODUk (in Gbps), referring to [G709-V3]. 402 Table 1 - Actual TS bandwidth of ODUk 404 ODUk Minimum Nominal Maximum 405 ------------------------------------------------------- 406 ODU2 1.249 384 632 1.249 409 620 1.249 434 608 407 ODU3 1.254 678 635 1.254 703 729 1.254 728 823 408 ODU4 1.301 683 217 1.301 709 251 1.301 735 285 410 Note that: 412 Minimum bandwidth of ODUTk.ts = 413 ODTUk.ts nominal bit rate * (1 - HO OPUk bit rate tolerance) 415 Maximum bandwidth of ODTUk.ts = 416 ODTUk.ts nominal bit rate * (1 + HO OPUk bit rate tolerance) 418 Where: HO OPUk bit rate tolerance = 20ppm 420 For different ODUk, the bandwidths of the tributary slot are 421 different, and so the total number of tributary slots to be reserved 422 for the ODUflex(CBR) may not be the same on different HO ODUk links. 423 This is why the traffic parameter should bring the actual bandwidth 424 information other than the NMC field. 426 4.2. Example of ODUflex(CBR) Traffic Parameter 428 This section gives an example to illustrate the usage of ODUflex(CBR) 429 traffic parameter. 431 As shown in Figure 2, assume there is an ODUflex(CBR) service 432 requesting a bandwidth of (2.5Gbps, +/-100ppm) from node A to node C. 433 In other words, the ODUflex traffic parameter indicates that Signal 434 Type is 33 (ODUflex(CBR)), Bit_Rate is 2.5Gbps and Tolerance is 435 100ppm. 437 +-----+ +---------+ +-----+ 438 | +-------------+ +-----+ +-------------+ | 439 | +=============+\| ODU |/+=============+ | 440 | +=============+/| flex+-+=============+ | 441 | +-------------+ | |\+=============+ | 442 | +-------------+ +-----+ +-------------+ | 443 | | | | | | 444 | | ....... | | ....... | | 445 | A +-------------+ B +-------------+ C | 446 +-----+ HO ODU4 +---------+ HO ODU2 +-----+ 448 =========: TS occupied by ODUflex 449 ---------: free TS 451 Figure 2 - Example of ODUflex(CBR) Traffic Parameter 453 - On the HO ODU4 link between node A and B: 455 The maximum bandwidth of the ODUflex equals 2.5Gbps * (1 + 456 100ppm), and the minimum bandwidth of the tributary slot of ODU4 457 equals 1.301 683 217Gbps, so the total number of tributary slots 458 N1 to be reserved on this link is: 460 N1 = ceiling (2.5Gbps * (1 + 100ppm) / 1.301 683 217) = 2 462 - On the HO ODU2 link between node B and C: 464 The maximum bandwidth of the ODUflex equals 2.5Gbps * (1 + 465 100ppm), and the minimum bandwidth of the tributary slot of ODU2 466 equals 1.249 384 632Gbps, so the total number of tributary slots 467 N2 to be reserved on this link is: 469 N2 = ceiling (2.5Gbps * (1 + 100ppm) / 1.249 384 632) = 3 471 5. Generalized Label 473 [RFC3471] has defined the Generalized Label which extends the 474 traditional label by allowing the representation of not only labels 475 which travel in-band with associated data packets, but also labels 476 which identify time-slots, wavelengths, or space division multiplexed 477 positions. The format of the corresponding RSVP-TE Generalized Label 478 object is defined in the Section 2.3 of [RFC3473]. 480 However, for different technologies, we usually need use specific 481 label rather than the Generalized Label. For example, the label 482 format described in [RFC4606] could be used for SDH/SONET, the label 483 format in [RFC4328] for G.709. 485 [RFC 6107] defines using hierarchical LSP for MLN. The H-LSPs can be 486 setup manually or dynamically (induced FAs) for multi-stage 487 multiplexing scenarios. Service creation in hierarchical OTN network 488 can be achieved in following 2 ways. 490 5.1. New definition of Single-stage ODUk Generalized Label 492 In order to be compatible with new types of ODU signal and new types 493 of tributary slot, the following new ODUk label format is defined: 495 0 1 2 3 496 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 1 497 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 498 | ODUj |OD(T)Uk| T | Reserved | TPN | 499 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 500 | Bit Map ......... | 501 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 503 ODUj and OD(T)Uk (4 bits respectively): indicate that LO ODUj is 504 multiplexed into HO ODUk(k>j), or LO ODUj is mapped into OTUk (j=k). 506 ODUj field Signal type 507 ---------- ----------- 508 0 LO ODU0 509 1 LO ODU1 510 2 LO ODU2 511 3 LO ODU3 512 4 LO ODU4 513 5 LO ODU2e 514 6 LO ODUflex 515 7-15 Reserved (for future use) 517 OD(T)Uk field Signal type 518 ------------- ----------- 519 0 Reserved (for future use) 520 1 HO ODU1 / OTU1 521 2 HO ODU2 / OTU2 522 3 HO ODU3 / OTU3 523 4 HO ODU4 / OTU4 524 5-15 Reserved (for future use) 526 T (2 bits): indicates the type of tributary slot of HO ODUk when LO 527 ODUj is multiplexed into the HO ODUk (j 1), the 767 first label indicates the components of the first virtually 768 concatenated signal; the second label indicates the components of the 769 second virtually concatenated signal; and so on. In case of 770 multiplication of multiplexed virtually concatenated signals (MT > 1), 771 the first label indicates the components of the first multiplexed 772 virtually concatenated signal; the second label indicates components 773 of the second multiplexed virtually concatenated signal; and so on. 775 In case of Multiple LSPs style, multiple control plane LSPs are 776 created with a single VCG and the VCAT Call can be used to associate 777 the control plane LSPs. The procedures are similar to section 6 of 778 [VCAT]. 780 5.1.4. Supporting Multiplexing Hierarchy 782 As described in [OTN-FRWK], one ODUj connection can be nested into 783 another ODUk (j| 798 | | | | 799 | |<---- ODU2 Connection ----->| | 800 | | | | 801 +----+ +----+ +----+ +----+ +----+ 802 | N1 +---------+ N2 +=========+ N3 +=========+ N4 +---------+ N5 | 803 +----+ +----+ +----+ +----+ +----+ 804 ODU3 link ODU3 link ODU3 link ODU3 link 806 Figure 3 - Example of multiplexing hierarchy 808 The control plane signaling should support the provisioning of 809 hierarchical multiplexing. Two methods are provided below (taking 810 Figure 3 as example): 812 - The outer ODU2 connection is created in advance based on network 813 planning, which is treated as a Forwarding Adjacency (FA). Then 814 the inner ODU0 can be created using the resource of the ODU2 FA. 815 In this case, the outer ODU2 and inner ODU0 connections are 816 created separately, and the normal ODU connection creation 817 procedure described in this document can be used. 819 - Using the multi-layer network signaling described in [RFC4206], 820 [RFC6107] and [RFC6001] (including related modifications, if 821 needed). That is, when the signaling message for ODUO connection 822 arrives at N2, a new RSVP session between N2 and N4 is triggered 823 to create the ODU2 connection. This ODU2 connection is treated as 824 an FA after it is created. And then the signaling procedure for 825 the ODU0 connection can be continued using the resource of the 826 ODU2 FA. 828 5.1.5. Supporting One-hop Multiplexing Hierarchy via Single Session 830 5.1.5.1. Multiplexing Hierarchy and Solution Alternatives 832 In order to support instantiating ODUj LSP involving one or more 833 intermediate ODU layers on an ODUk link (i.e., the scenario described 834 in Requirement 3 of Section 3.1), there are two approaches to achieve 835 the objective. The existing approach is the hierarchical LSP (H-LSP) 836 approach described in Section 5.5, and another one is to use the 837 multi-stage label approach. 839 For the multi-stage label approach, the whole multiplexing structure 840 on the ODUk link (i.e., ODUj service multiplexed into one or more 841 intermediate ODU layers and then multiplexed into ODUk link) is 842 included in the signaling message which is used for creating the ODUj 843 service. After receiving the message, both ends of the ODUk link will 844 construct the multi-stage multiplexing in the data plane. In this way, 845 creation of intermediate ODU layers is treated as part of creation of 846 the ODUj service, without any intermediate ODU FA on the ODUk link. 847 Note that the ODUk link can either be mapped to an OTUk link directly, 848 or be a multi-hop FA created in advance crossing multiple OTU links 849 (using H-LSP mechanism). 851 5.1.5.2. Multi Stage Label Format 853 In this document, a new optional object named MULTI-STAGE LABEL 854 Object is introduced to indicate how the intermediate ODU layers are 855 multiplexed into ODUk link in the one-hop multi-stage multiplexing 856 scenario. The format of this object is shown below (The Class-Num and 857 the C-Type of this new object are TBD): 859 0 1 2 3 860 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 1 861 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 862 | Length | Class-Num=TBD | C-Type=TBD | 863 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 864 | Num MUX Stages| Reserved | 865 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 866 | Tributary Slot Info (Stage-2) | 867 | (Variable Length) | 868 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 869 | . . . | 870 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 871 | Tributary Slot Info (Stage-n) | 872 | (Variable Length) | 873 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 875 Num MUX Stages: This field indicates the number of multiplexing 876 stages specified by the label. 878 Tributary Slot Info: This field has the same format as the ODUk label 879 format described in Section 5.1. In the case of n-step multiplexing 880 (e.g., ODUj into ODUi1 into ODUi2 ... into ODUi(n-1) into ODUk 881 multiplexing), The Tributary Slot Info (Stage-2) indicates how ODUi1 882 is multiplexed into ODUi2; the Tributary Slot Info (Stage-3) 883 indicates how ODUi2 is multiplexed into ODUi3 ... and the Tributary 884 Slot Info (Stage-n) indicates how ODUi(n-1) is multiplexed into the 885 ODUk link. Note that how ODUj is multiplexed into ODUi1 is indicated 886 by the generalized label and is not included in this object. 888 Note that the MULTI-STAGE LABEL Object is not necessary and must not 889 be included in the signaling message in case the signaling message 890 is used for creating only one ODU layer connection via single stage 891 muxing. One example is to instantiate ODUj service on an ODUk link 892 via single stage muxing. Another example is to use H-LSP mechanism to 893 instantiate ODUj service involving one or more intermediate ODU FAs, 894 where multiple RSVP sessions will be created separately, each of 895 which is used to create one ODU-FA layer connection In such cases, 896 the generalized label is used without the multi-stage label, as 897 described in Section 5. 899 5.1.5.3. Label format for NVC or Multiplier > 1 901 For NVC or Multiplier field value > 1, the multi-stage label format 902 defined in Section 6.2 needs to be repeated NVC/multiplier times. 904 0 1 2 3 905 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 1 906 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 907 | Multi-stage Label Instance #1 | 908 | (Variable Length) | 909 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 910 | | | 911 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 912 | Multi-stage Label Instance #n | 913 | (n = NVC/Multiplier) | 914 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 916 5.1.5.4. Usage of Multi-stage Label in Multi Stage Muxing 918 When an ODUj LSP is requested where one or more intermediate ODU 919 layers are involved on an ODUk link, the multi-stage label together 920 with the generalized label can be used to indicate the multi-stage 921 multiplexing structure. The generalized label, as described in 922 Section 5, is used to indicate how the ODUj service is multiplexed 923 into the first intermediate ODU layer and the multi-stage label is 924 used to indicate how the intermediate ODU layers are multiplexed into 925 the ODUk link. 927 Take Figure 4 as an example. Assume on an OTU3 Link, a restrictive 928 MUX hierarchy is supported on the associated interfaces. In order to 929 switch ODU1 on this Link, ODU3 and ODU2 need to be terminated on the 930 same span as the OTU3 link. 932 ODU1 ODU0 933 \ / 934 ODU2 935 | 936 ---------- ODU3 ---------- 937 | | | | | 938 | Node | OTU3 | Node | 939 | |-----------------------------| | 940 | A | | B | 941 | | | | 942 ---------- ---------- 943 |<----- OTU3 TE-Link ------>| 945 Figure 4 - Multi-stage Label on OTUk Link 947 In this example, the generalized label is used to indicate how the 948 ODU1 service is multiplexed into the intermediate ODU2, the 949 procedures are the same as described in Section 5. An example 950 generalized label is shown below, assuming that the ODU1 is 951 multiplexed into the 2nd and the 4th tributary slot of ODU2, wherein 952 the type of the tributary slot is 1.25Gbps, and the TPN value is 1: 954 0 1 2 3 955 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 1 956 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 957 |0 0 0 1|0 0 1 0|0 0| Reserved | TPN = 1 | 958 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 959 |0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0| Padded Bits (0) | 960 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 962 At the same time, the MULTI-STAGE LABEL Object is also included in 963 the signaling message, which is used to indicate how the intermediate 964 ODU2 is multiplexed into the ODU3. An example multi-stage label is 965 shown below, assuming that the ODU2 is multiplexed into the 2nd, 3rd, 966 5th and 7th tributary slot of ODU3, wherein the type of the tributary 967 slot is 2.5Gbps, and the TPN value is 1: 969 0 1 2 3 970 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 1 971 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 972 | MUX-Stages=2 | Reserved | 973 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 974 |0 0 1 0|0 0 1 1|0 1| Reserved | TPN = 1 | 975 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 976 |0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0| Padded Bits (0) | 977 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 979 5.2. New definition of Multi-stage ODUk Generalized Label 981 Multi-stage label is a composite label, which can carry timeslot 982 information for one or more ODU layers. 984 ODUk-------------------ODUj-------------------ODUh 986 TS/TPN for stage-1 TS/TPN for stage-2 988 Figure 5 - Multi-stage Label 990 In an OTN network, path of an LSP could be going through links that 991 support restrictive hierarchy. Multi-stage Label is needed when 992 Service ODU layer requires termination of more than one HO-ODUs on a 993 given OTU/ODU Link. 995 Multi stage label allows implicit creation of intermediate ODU layers 996 for supporting the instantiation of service ODU layer on a given hop, 997 thus eliminating the need for one hop H-LSPs pertaining to 998 intermediate ODU layers. 1000 If higher order ODU layers spans more than one hop due to switching 1001 restrictions, H-LSP needs to be used in tandem with multi-stage Label 1002 to facilitate end to end service creation. 1004 5.2.1. Multi-stage Label 1006 A multi-stage label includes TS and TPN information for all the 1007 stages of a multi-stage multiplexing hierarchy. 1009 The format of a multi-stage label is explained below. 1011 0 1 2 3 1012 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 1013 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1014 | Num MUX Stages| OD(T)Uk (ST) | Reserved | 1015 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1016 | Tributary Slot Info (Stage-1) | 1017 | (Variable Length) | 1018 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1019 | . . . | 1020 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1021 | Tributary Slot Info (Stage-n) | 1022 | (Variable Length) | 1023 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1025 Num MUX Stages: 1027 This field indicates the number of multiplexing stages specified by 1028 the label. 1030 OD(T)Uk: 1032 This field encodes the signal type of HO OD(T)Uk container. 1034 Tributary Slot Info: 1036 Tributary Slot Information for a single stage is encoded as follows. 1038 0 1 2 3 1039 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 1040 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1041 | ODUj (ST) | T | Length | Tributary Port Number | 1042 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1043 | Variable Length Bit Map (4-byte boundary aligned) | 1044 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1046 ODUj: 1048 This field indicates the signal type of a LO-ODU being multiplexed 1049 into its immediate HO-ODU. 1051 Length: 1053 This field indicates the number of valid Bits in the Bit Map 1054 excluding the filler bits. 1056 T & Tributary Port Number & Bit Map: See section 5.1. 1058 5.2.2. Label format for NVC or Multiplier > 1 1060 For NVC or Multiplier field value > 1, the label format defined in 1061 section 5 needs to be repeated NVC/multiplier times. 1063 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 1064 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1065 | Label Instance #1 | 1066 | (Variable Length) | 1067 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1068 | | | 1069 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1070 | Label Instance #n | 1071 | (n = NVC/Multiplier) | 1072 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1074 5.2.3. Usage of Multi-stage Label 1076 Multi-stage Label is needed when switching of an ODU Layer requires 1077 termination of more than one HO-ODUs on a given OTU/ODU Link. This 1078 eliminates the need for creating H-LSPs whose span matches its parent 1079 TE-Link. 1081 Example-1: 1083 Assume on an OTU3 Link, a restrictive MUX hierarchy (as shown in 1084 figure 6) is supported on the associated interfaces. In order to 1085 switch ODU1 on this Link, ODU3 and ODU2 need to be terminated on the 1086 same span as the OTU3 link. If multi-stage Label is not supported, H- 1087 LSP need to be created for ODU3 and ODU2 layers (or just ODU2 layer 1088 at the minimum) in order to support ODU1 LSP. Creation of ODU3 and 1089 ODU2 H-LSP on top of OTU3 Link on the same span is not really 1090 required as bandwidth management for all ODU layers can still be 1091 managed on the OTU3 Link itself. 1093 Multi-stage Label helps in implicit creation of ODU3 and ODU2 layers 1094 as part of ODU1 LSP setup and thus eliminates the need for the 1095 creation of the H-LSP on every hop. 1097 ODU0 1098 | 1099 ODU1 ODU0 1100 \ / 1101 ODU2 1102 | 1103 ---------- ODU3 ---------- 1104 | | | | | 1105 | Node | OTU3 | Node | 1106 | |-----------------------------| | 1107 | A | | B | 1108 | | | | 1109 ---------- ---------- 1110 |<----- OTU3 TE-Link ------->| 1111 Label Format: 1112 Stage-1: ODU3<-ODU2/TPN/Trib Slots 1113 Stage-2: ODU2<-ODU1/TPN/Trib Slots 1115 Figure 6 - Multi-stage Label on OTUk Link 1117 Example-2: 1119 Assume on an ODU3 H-LSP (B-C-D), signaling of ODU1 LSP requires 1120 termination of ODU2. Multi-stage Label helps in implicit creation of 1121 ODU2 layer as part of ODU1 LSP setup (A-B-D-E). 1123 ODU1 ODU1 1124 | | 1125 ODU2 ODU2 1126 | | 1127 ODU3 ODU3 1128 | | 1129 OTU3 OTU3 1130 / \ 1131 ------ -----/ ------ \------ ------ 1132 | | | | | | | | | | 1133 |Node| |Node| |Node| |Node| |Node| 1134 | |--------| |--------| |--------| |--------| | 1135 | A | | B | | C | | D | | E | 1136 | | | | | | | | | | 1137 ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ 1138 |<-OTU2->| |<-OTU3->| |<-OTU3->| |<-OTU2->| 1139 | | 1140 |<-----ODU3 H-LSP----->| 1142 Figure 7 - Multi-stage Label on ODUk Link 1144 Note: Multi-stage Label is NOT intended to facilitate the creation of 1145 H-LSP or Hierarchical LSP. It is basically used to eliminate the need 1146 for H-LSP in some obvious scenarios. 1148 5.2.4. Label Distribution Rules 1150 This document does not change the existing label distribution 1151 procedures defined in [RFC4328] except that the new ODU label should 1152 be processed as follows. 1154 A. Sending Side 1156 When Generalized Label Request is received on given node for setting 1157 up an ODU LSP from its upstream neighbor, it reserves the bandwidth 1158 required for the ODU Layer being switched and also the terminating 1159 HO-ODUs layers involved. It sends upstream label and suggested label 1160 (if applicable) to the downstream node and downstream label via PATH 1161 Message and downstream label to the upstream node via RESV Message. 1163 Note that Label can also be explicitly specified by source node. 1165 The encoding of Generalized Label is as follows: 1167 Case-1: ODUk mapping into OTUk 1168 Number of MUX stages = 0 1169 Tributary Slot information is not included. 1171 Case-2: ODUj mux into ODUk 1172 Number of MUX Stages = 1. 1173 Stage-1: Length = . 1174 TPN = 1175 TS BitMap = 1177 Case-3 ODUh mux into ODUj into ODUk 1178 Number of MUX Stages = 2. 1179 Stage-1: Length = . 1180 TPN = 1181 TS BitMap = 1182 Stage-2: Length = . 1183 TPN = 1184 TS BitMap = 1186 B. Receiving Side 1188 The decoding of the Generalized Label is as follows: 1190 Case-1: ODUk mapping into OTUk 1191 For ODUk to OTUk mapping, the Tributary Slot Information is not 1192 expected. 1194 Case-2: ODUj mux into ODUk 1195 For ODUj to ODUk multiplexing, one MUX stage Label is expected. 1196 The node extracts the Bit Map field in Tributary Slot Info using the 1197 Length field. The position of Bit in the Bitmap interpreted as the 1198 Tributary Slot Number. The value stored in the bit indicates if it is 1199 reserved for the ODUj. 1201 Case-3: ODUh mux into ODUj into ODUk 1202 For ODUh mux into ODUj into ODUk, two MUX stage Label is expected. 1203 Each stage is further decoded as explained in case-2 above. 1205 5.2.5. Examples 1207 Example-1: ODUj LSP over OTUk Links 1209 Consider the network topology shown in the Figure 8 below: 1211 +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ 1212 | OTN | | OTN | | OTN | | OTN | 1213 | SW |<-OTU2 Link->| SW |<-OTU3 Link->| SW |<-OTU2 Link->| SW | 1214 | A | | B | | C | | D | 1215 +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ 1217 Figure 8 - OTN Signaling Example 1219 Assumptions: 1221 (1) ODU2 links between OTN-Switches A & B and C & D support 1.25Gbps 1222 TS Granularity. 1224 (2) ODU3 link between OTN-Switches B & C supports TS Granularity of 1225 2.5Gbps only. Hence, ODU0 switching on this link is possible only 1226 through ODU3-ODU2-ODU0 or ODU3-ODU1-ODU0 multiplexing hierarchies. 1228 G.709 Traffic Parameters and Generalized Label for ODU0 LSP from node 1229 A to D is captured below: 1231 A. G.709 Traffic Parameters 1232 Signal Type = ODU0 1233 NMC/Tolerance = 0 // NMC is not used. 1234 NVC = 0 1235 Multiplier (MT) = 1 1236 Bit_Rate = 0 1238 B. Generalized Label Format: 1240 +=============+==============+==============+==============+ 1241 | | A to B | B to C | C to D | 1242 +=============+==============+==============+==============+ 1243 | # of Stages | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1244 +-------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+ 1245 | Stage-1 | ODU2<--ODU0 | ODU3<--ODU2 | ODU2<--ODU0 | 1246 | | TSG = 1.25G | TSG = 2.5G | TSG = 1.25G | 1247 | | #TSs = 8 | #TSs = 16 | #TSs = 8 | 1248 | | TPN = <1..8> | TPN = <1..4> | TPN = <1..8> | 1249 | | BMap = 4bytes| BMap = 4bytes| BMap = 4bytes| 1250 +-------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+ 1251 | Stage-2 | N/A | ODU2<--ODU0 | N/A | 1252 | | | TSG = 1.25G | | 1253 | | | #TSs = 8 | | 1254 | | | TPN = <1..8> | | 1255 | | | BMap = 4bytes| | 1256 +-------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+ 1258 Example 2: ODUj LSP over ODUk H-LSP 1260 Refer to Figure 7. The G.709 Traffic Parameters and Generalized Label 1261 for ODU1 LSP from Node A to E are captured below: 1263 A. G.709 Traffic Parameters: 1264 Signal Type = ODU1 1265 NMC/Tolerance = 0 // NMC is not used. 1267 NVC = 0 1268 Multiplier (MT) = 1 1269 Bit_Rate = 0 1271 B. Generalized Label Format: 1273 +=============+==============+==============+==============+ 1274 | | A to B | B to D | D to E | 1275 +=============+==============+==============+==============+ 1276 | # of Stages | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1277 +-------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+ 1278 | Stage-1 | ODU2<--ODU1 | ODU3<--ODU2 | ODU2<--ODU1 | 1279 | | TSG = 1.25G | TSG = 2.5G | TSG = 1.25G | 1280 | | #TSs = 8 | #TSs = 16 | #TSs = 8 | 1281 | | TPN = <1..4> | TPN = <1..4> | TPN = <1..4> | 1282 | | BMap = 4bytes| BMap = 4bytes| BMap = 4bytes| 1283 +-------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+ 1284 | Stage-2 | N/A | ODU2<--ODU1 | N/A | 1285 | | | TSG = 1.25G | | 1286 | | | #TSs = 8 | | 1287 | | | TPN = <1..4> | | 1288 | | | BMap = 4bytes| | 1289 +-------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+ 1291 5.3. Control Plane Backward Compatibility Considerations 1293 Since the [RFC4328] has been deployed in the network for the nodes 1294 that support [G709-V1] (herein we call them "legacy nodes"), backward 1295 compatibility SHOULD be taken into consideration when the new nodes 1296 (i.e., nodes that support [G709-V3]) and the legacy nodes are 1297 interworking. 1299 For backward compatibility consideration, the new node SHOULD have 1300 the ability to generate and parse legacy labels. 1302 o For the legacy node, it always generates and sends legacy label to 1303 its upstream node, no matter the upstream node is new or legacy, 1304 as described in [RFC4328]. 1306 o For the new node, it will generate and send legacy label if its 1307 upstream node is a legacy one, and generate and send new label if 1308 its upstream node is a new one. 1310 One backwards compatibility example is shown in Figure 9: 1312 Path Path Path Path 1313 +-----+ ----> +-----+ ----> +------+ ----> +------+ ----> +-----+ 1314 | | | | | | | | | | 1315 | A +-------+ B +-------+ C +-------+ D +-------+ E | 1316 | new | | new | |legacy| |legacy| | new | 1317 +-----+ <---- +-----+ <---- +------+ <---- +------+ <---- +-----+ 1318 Resv Resv Resv Resv 1319 (new label) (legacy label) (legacy label) (legacy label) 1321 Figure 9 - Backwards compatibility example 1323 As described above, for backward compatibility considerations, it is 1324 necessary for a new node to know whether the neighbor node is new or 1325 legacy. 1327 One optional method is manual configuration. But it is recommended to 1328 use LMP to discover the capability of the neighbor node automatically, 1329 as described in [OTN-LMP]. 1331 When performing the HO ODU link capability negotiation: 1333 o If the neighbor node only support the 2.5Gbps TS and only support 1334 ODU1/ODU2/ODU3, the neighbor node should be treated as a legacy 1335 node. 1337 o If the neighbor node can support the 1.25Gbps TS, or can support 1338 other LO ODU types defined in [G709-V3]), the neighbor node should 1339 be treated as new node. 1341 o If the neighbor node returns a LinkSummaryNack message including 1342 an ERROR_CODE indicating nonsupport of HO ODU link capability 1343 negotiation, the neighbor node should be treated as a legacy node. 1345 6. Security Considerations 1347 This document introduces no new security considerations to the 1348 existing GMPLS signaling protocols. Referring to [RFC3473], further 1349 details of the specific security measures are provided. Additionally, 1350 [GMPLS-SEC] provides an overview of security vulnerabilities and 1351 protection mechanisms for the GMPLS control plane. 1353 7. IANA Considerations 1355 - G.709 SENDER_TSPEC and FLOWSPEC objects: 1357 The traffic parameters, which are carried in the G.709 1358 SENDER_TSPEC and FLOWSPEC objects, do not require any new object 1359 class and type based on [RFC4328]: 1361 o G.709 SENDER_TSPEC Object: Class = 12, C-Type = 5 [RFC4328] 1363 o G.709 FLOWSPEC Object: Class = 9, C-Type = 5 [RFC4328] 1365 - Generalized Label Object: 1367 The new defined ODU label (session 5) is a kind of generalized 1368 label. Therefore, the Class-Num and C-Type of the ODU label is 1369 the same as that of generalized label described in [RFC3473], 1370 i.e., Class-Num = 16, C-Type = 2. 1372 8. References 1374 8.1. Normative References 1376 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 1377 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 1379 [RFC4328] D. Papadimitriou, Ed. "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label 1380 Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Extensions for G.709 Optical 1381 Transport Networks Control", RFC 4328, Jan 2006. 1383 [RFC3209] D. Awduche et al, "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP 1384 Tunnels", RFC3209, December 2001. 1386 [RFC3471] Berger, L., Editor, "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label 1387 Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Functional Description", RFC 1388 3471, January 2003. 1390 [RFC3473] L. Berger, Ed., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching 1391 (GMPLS) Signaling Resource ReserVation Protocol-Traffic 1392 Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions", RFC 3473, January 2003. 1394 [RFC3945] Mannie, E., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching 1395 (GMPLS) Architecture", RFC 3945, October 2004. 1397 [VCAT] G. Bernstein et al, "Operating Virtual Concatenation (VCAT) 1398 and the Link Capacity Adjustment Scheme (LCAS) with 1399 Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)", draft- 1400 ietf-ccamp-gmpls-vcat-lcas-13.txt, May 4, 2011. 1402 [RFC4206] K. Kompella, Y. Rekhter, Ed., " Label Switched Paths (LSP) 1403 Hierarchy with Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching 1404 (GMPLS) Traffic Engineering (TE)", RFC 4206, October 2005. 1406 [RFC6107] K. Shiomoto, A. Farrel, "Procedures for Dynamically 1407 Signaled Hierarchical Label Switched Paths", RFC6107, 1408 February 2011. 1410 [RFC6001] Dimitri Papadimitriou et al, "Generalized Multi-Protocol 1411 Label Switching (GMPLS) Protocol Extensions for Multi-Layer 1412 and Multi-Region Networks (MLN/MRN)", RFC6001, February 21, 1413 2010. 1415 [OTN-frwk] Fatai Zhang et al, "Framework for GMPLS and PCE Control of 1416 G.709 Optical Transport Networks", draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls- 1417 g709-framework-04.txt, March 11, 2011. 1419 [OTN-info] S. Belotti et al, "Information model for G.709 Optical 1420 Transport Networks (OTN)", draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-g709-info- 1421 model-00.txt, April 18, 2011. 1423 [OTN-LMP] Fatai Zhang, Ed., "Link Management Protocol (LMP) 1424 extensions for G.709 Optical Transport Networks", draft- 1425 zhang-ccamp-gmpls-g.709-lmp-discovery-04.txt, April 6, 2011. 1427 [G709-V3] ITU-T, "Interfaces for the Optical Transport Network (OTN) 1428 ", G.709/Y.1331, December 2009. 1430 8.2. Informative References 1432 [G709-V1] ITU-T, "Interface for the Optical Transport Network (OTN)," 1433 G.709 Recommendation (and Amendment 1), February 2001 1434 (November 2001). 1436 [G709-V2] ITU-T, "Interface for the Optical Transport Network (OTN)," 1437 G.709 Recommendation, March 2003. 1439 [G798-V2] ITU-T, "Characteristics of optical transport network 1440 hierarchy equipment functional blocks", G.798, December 1441 2006. 1443 [G798-V3] ITU-T, "Characteristics of optical transport network 1444 hierarchy equipment functional blocks", G.798v3, consented 1445 June 2010. 1447 [RFC4506] M. Eisler, Ed., "XDR: External Data Representation 1448 Standard", RFC 4506, May 2006. 1450 [IEEE] "IEEE Standard for Binary Floating-Point Arithmetic", 1451 ANSI/IEEE Standard 754-1985, Institute of Electrical and 1452 Electronics Engineers, August 1985. 1454 [GMPLS-SEC] Fang, L., Ed., "Security Framework for MPLS and GMPLS 1455 Networks", Work in Progress, October 2009. 1457 9. Authors' Addresses 1459 Fatai Zhang 1460 Huawei Technologies 1461 F3-5-B R&D Center, Huawei Base 1462 Bantian, Longgang District 1463 Shenzhen 518129 P.R.China 1464 Phone: +86-755-28972912 1465 Email: zhangfatai@huawei.com 1467 Guoying Zhang 1468 China Academy of Telecommunication Research of MII 1469 11 Yue Tan Nan Jie Beijing, P.R.China 1470 Phone: +86-10-68094272 1471 Email: zhangguoying@mail.ritt.com.cn 1473 Sergio Belotti 1474 Alcatel-Lucent 1475 Optics CTO 1476 Via Trento 30 20059 Vimercate (Milano) Italy 1477 +39 039 6863033 1478 Email: sergio.belotti@alcatel-lucent.it 1480 Daniele Ceccarelli 1481 Ericsson 1482 Via A. Negrone 1/A 1483 Genova - Sestri Ponente 1484 Italy 1485 Email: daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com 1486 Khuzema Pithewan 1487 Infinera Corporation 1488 169, Java Drive 1489 Sunnyvale, CA-94089, USA 1490 Email: kpithewan@infinera.com 1492 Yi Lin 1493 Huawei Technologies 1494 F3-5-B R&D Center, Huawei Base 1495 Bantian, Longgang District 1496 Shenzhen 518129 P.R.China 1497 Phone: +86-755-28972914 1498 Email: yi.lin@huawei.com 1500 Yunbin Xu 1501 China Academy of Telecommunication Research of MII 1502 11 Yue Tan Nan Jie Beijing, P.R.China 1503 Phone: +86-10-68094134 1504 Email: xuyunbin@mail.ritt.com.cn 1506 Pietro Grandi 1507 Alcatel-Lucent 1508 Optics CTO 1509 Via Trento 30 20059 Vimercate (Milano) Italy 1510 +39 039 6864930 1511 Email: pietro_vittorio.grandi@alcatel-lucent.it 1513 Diego Caviglia 1514 Ericsson 1515 Via A. Negrone 1/A 1516 Genova - Sestri Ponente 1517 Italy 1518 Email: diego.caviglia@ericsson.com 1520 Mohit Misra 1521 Infinera Corporation 1522 169, Java Drive 1523 Sunnyvale, CA-94089, USA 1524 Email: mmisra@infinera.com 1526 Rajan Rao 1527 Infinera Corporation 1528 169, Java Drive 1529 Sunnyvale, CA-94089, USA 1530 Email: rrao@infinera.com 1532 Ashok Kunjidhapatham 1533 Infinera Corporation 1534 169, Java Drive 1535 Sunnyvale, CA-94089, USA 1536 Email: akunjidhapatham@infinera.com 1538 Biao Lu 1539 Infinera Corporation 1540 169, Java Drive 1541 Sunnyvale, CA-94089, USA 1542 Email: blu@infinera.com 1544 Lyndon Ong 1545 Ciena 1546 PO Box 308, Cupertino, CA 95015, USA 1547 EMail: lyong@ciena.com 1549 Igor Bryskin 1550 Adva Optical 1551 EMail: IBryskin@advaoptical.com 1553 Acknowledgment 1555 The authors would like to thank Jonathan Sadler and John E Drake for 1556 their useful comments to the document. 1558 Intellectual Property 1560 The IETF Trust takes no position regarding the validity or scope of 1561 any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be 1562 claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology 1563 described in any IETF Document or the extent to which any license 1564 under such rights might or might not be available; nor does it 1565 represent that it has made any independent effort to identify any 1566 such rights. 1568 Copies of Intellectual Property disclosures made to the IETF 1569 Secretariat and any assurances of licenses to be made available, or 1570 the result of an attempt made to obtain a general license or 1571 permission for the use of such proprietary rights by implementers or 1572 users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR 1573 repository at http://www.ietf.org/ipr 1575 The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any 1576 copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary 1577 rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement 1578 any standard or specification contained in an IETF Document. Please 1579 address the information to the IETF at ietf-ipr@ietf.org. 1581 The definitive version of an IETF Document is that published by, or 1582 under the auspices of, the IETF. Versions of IETF Documents that are 1583 published by third parties, including those that are translated into 1584 other languages, should not be considered to be definitive versions 1585 of IETF Documents. The definitive version of these Legal Provisions 1586 is that published by, or under the auspices of, the IETF. Versions of 1587 these Legal Provisions that are published by third parties, including 1588 those that are translated into other languages, should not be 1589 considered to be definitive versions of these Legal Provisions. 1591 For the avoidance of doubt, each Contributor to the IETF Standards 1592 Process licenses each Contribution that he or she makes as part of 1593 the IETF Standards Process to the IETF Trust pursuant to the 1594 provisions of RFC 5378. No language to the contrary, or terms, 1595 conditions or rights that differ from or are inconsistent with the 1596 rights and licenses granted under RFC 5378, shall have any effect and 1597 shall be null and void, whether published or posted by such 1598 Contributor, or included with or in such Contribution. 1600 Disclaimer of Validity 1601 All IETF Documents and the information contained therein are provided 1602 on an "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE 1603 REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE 1604 IETF TRUST AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL 1605 WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY 1606 WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION THEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE 1607 ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS 1608 FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. 1610 Copyright Notice 1612 Copyright (c) 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 1613 document authors. All rights reserved. 1615 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 1616 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 1617 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 1618 publication of this document. Please review these documents 1619 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 1620 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 1621 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 1622 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 1623 described in the Simplified BSD License.