[Docs] [txt|pdf] [Tracker] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: 00 01 draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-wson-encode

Network Working Group                                      G. Bernstein
Internet Draft                                        Grotto Networking
Intended status: Standards Track                                 Y. Lee
Expires: May 2009                                                 D. Li
                                                                 Huawei
                                                             W. Imajuku
                                                                    NTT


                                                       November 3, 2008

        Routing and Wavelength Assignment Information Encoding for
                   Wavelength Switched Optical Networks


                 draft-bernstein-ccamp-wson-encode-01.txt


Status of this Memo

   By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that
   any applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is
   aware have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she
   becomes aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of
   BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that
   other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
   Drafts.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html

   This Internet-Draft will expire on May 3, 2007.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008).




Bernstein and Lee        Expires May 3, 2009                   [Page 1]


Internet-Draft   Wavelength Switched Optical Networks     November 2008


Abstract

   A wavelength switched optical network (WSON) requires that certain
   key information elements are made available to facilitate path
   computation and the establishment of label switching paths (LSPs).
   The information model described in "Routing and Wavelength Assignment
   Information for Wavelength Switched Optical Networks" shows what
   information is required at specific points in the WSON.

   The information may be used in Generalized Multiprotocol Label
   Switching (GMPLS) signaling protocols, and may be distributed by
   GMSPL routing protocols. Other distribution mechanisms (for example,
   XML-based protocols) may also be used.

   This document provides efficient, protocol-agnostic encodings for the
   information elements necessary to operate a WSON. It is intended that
   protocol-specific documents will reference this memo to describe how
   information is carried for specific uses.



Conventions used in this document

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in RFC-2119 [RFC2119].

Table of Contents


   1. Introduction...................................................3
   2. Terminology....................................................3
   3. Encoding of WSON Information: Sub-TLVs.........................4
      3.1. Link Set Sub-TLV..........................................4
      3.2. Connectivity Matrix Sub-TLV...............................6
      3.3. Wavelength Information Encoding...........................9
      3.4. Wavelength Set Sub-TLV...................................10
         3.4.1. Inclusive/Exclusive Wavelength Lists................10
         3.4.2. Inclusive/Exclusive Wavelength Ranges...............11
         3.4.3. Bitmap Wavelength Set...............................11
      3.5. Port Wavelength Restriction sub-TLV......................13
   4. Composite TLVs................................................14
      4.1. WSON Node TLV............................................14
      4.2. WSON Link TLV............................................14
      4.3. WSON Dynamic Link TLV....................................15
      4.4. WSON Dynamic Node TLV....................................16
   5. Security Considerations.......................................16
   6. IANA Considerations...........................................16


   Bernstein and Lee Expires May 3, 2009  [Page 2]


Internet-Draft   Wavelength Switched Optical Networks     November 2008


   7. Acknowledgments...............................................16
   8. References....................................................17
      8.1. Normative References.....................................17
      8.2. Informative References...................................17
   9. Contributors..................................................19
   Authors' Addresses...............................................19
   Intellectual Property Statement..................................20
   Disclaimer of Validity...........................................21

1. Introduction

   A Wavelength Switched Optical Network (WSON) is a Wavelength Division
   Multiplexing (WDM) optical network in which switching is performed
   selectively based on the center wavelength of an optical signal.

   [WSON-Frame] describes a framework for Generalized Multiprotocol
   Label Switching (GMPLS) and Path Computation Element (PCE) control of
   a WSON. Based on this framework, [WSON-Info] describes an information
   model that specifies what information is needed at various points in
   a WSON in order to compute paths and establish Label Switched Paths
   (LSPs).

   This document provides efficient encodings of information needed by
   the routing and wavelength assignment (RWA) process in a WSON. Such
   encodings can be used to extend GMPLS signaling and routing
   protocols. In addition these encodings could be used by other
   mechanisms to convey this same information to a path computation
   element (PCE). Note that since these encodings are relatively
   efficient they can provide more accurate analysis of the control
   plane communications/processing load for WSONs looking to utilize a
   GMPLS control plane.

2. Terminology

   CWDM: Coarse Wavelength Division Multiplexing.

   DWDM: Dense Wavelength Division Multiplexing.

   FOADM: Fixed Optical Add/Drop Multiplexer.

   ROADM: Reconfigurable Optical Add/Drop Multiplexer. A reduced port
   count wavelength selective switching element featuring ingress and
   egress line side ports as well as add/drop side ports.

   RWA: Routing and Wavelength Assignment.

   Wavelength Conversion. The process of converting an information
   bearing optical signal centered at a given wavelength to one with


   Bernstein and Lee Expires May 3, 2009  [Page 3]


Internet-Draft   Wavelength Switched Optical Networks     November 2008


   "equivalent" content centered at a different wavelength. Wavelength
   conversion can be implemented via an optical-electronic-optical (OEO)
   process or via a strictly optical process.

   WDM: Wavelength Division Multiplexing.

   Wavelength Switched Optical Network (WSON): A WDM based optical
   network in which switching is performed selectively based on the
   center wavelength of an optical signal.

3. Encoding of WSON Information: Sub-TLVs

   A TLV encoding of the high level WSON information model [WSON-Info]
   is given in the following sections. This encoding is designed to be
   suitable for use in the GMPLS routing protocols OSPF [RFC4203] and
   IS-IS [RFC5307] and in the PCE protocol PCEP [PCEP]. Note that the
   information distributed in [RFC4203] and [RFC5307] is arranged via
   the nesting of sub-TLVs within TLVs and this document makes use of
   such constructs.

3.1. Link Set Sub-TLV

   We will frequently need to describe properties of groups of links. To
   do so efficiently we can make use of a link set concept similar to
   the label set concept of [RFC3471]. All links will be denoted by
   their local link identifier as defined an used in [RFC4202],
   [RFC4203], and [RFC5307].

   The information carried in a Link Set is defined by:

       0                   1                   2                   3
       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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |    Action     |Dir|  Format   |         Reserved              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                       Link Identifier 1                       |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      :                               :                               :
      :                               :                               :
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                       Link Identifier N                       |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


      Action: 8 bits

         0 - Inclusive List



   Bernstein and Lee Expires May 3, 2009  [Page 4]


Internet-Draft   Wavelength Switched Optical Networks     November 2008


   Indicates that the TLV contains one or more link elements that are
   included in the Link Set.

         2 - Inclusive Range

   Indicates that the TLV contains a range of links.  The object/TLV
   contains two link elements. The first element indicates the start of
   the range. The second element indicates the end of the range. A value
   of zero indicates that there is no bound on the corresponding portion
   of the range.

   Dir: Directionality of the Link Set (2 bits)

   0 -- bidirectional

   1 -- incoming

   2 -- outgoing

   In optical networks we think in terms of unidirectional as well as
   bidirectional links. For example, wavelength restrictions or
   connectivity may be different for an ingress port, than for its
   "companion" egress port if one exists. Note that "interfaces" such as
   those discussed in the Interfaces MIB [RFC2863] are assumed to be
   bidirectional. This also applies to the links advertised in various
   link state routing protocols.

   Format: The format of the link identifier (6 bits)

   0 -- Link Local Identifier

   Others TBD.

   Note that all link identifiers in the same list must be of the same
   type.

   Reserved: 16 bits

   This field is reserved. It MUST be set to zero on transmission and
   MUST be ignored on receipt.

      Link Identifier:

   The link identifier represents the port which is being described
   either for connectivity or wavelength restrictions. This can be the
   link local identifier of [RFC4202], GMPLS routing, [RFC4203] GMPLS
   OSPF routing, and [RFC5307] IS-IS GMPLS routing. The use of the link



   Bernstein and Lee Expires May 3, 2009  [Page 5]


Internet-Draft   Wavelength Switched Optical Networks     November 2008


   local identifier format can result in more compact WSON encodings
   when the assignments are done in a reasonable fashion.

3.2. Connectivity Matrix Sub-TLV

   The switch and fixed connectivity matrices of [WSON-Info] can be
   compactly represented in terms of a minimal list of ingress and
   egress port set pairs that have mutual connectivity. As described in
   [Switch] such a minimal list representation leads naturally to a
   graph representation for path computation purposes that involves the
   fewest additional nodes and links.

   A TLV encoding of this list of link set pairs is:

       0                   1                   2                   3
       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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      | Connectivity  |               Reserved                        |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                         Link Set A #1                         |
      :                               :                               :
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                         Link Set B #1                         :
      :                               :                               :
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                       Additional Link set pairs as needed     |
      :                     to specify connectivity                   :
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


   Where Connectivity = 0 if the device is fixed

                        1 if the device is switched(e.g., ROADM/OXC)

   TBD: Should we just have two sub-TLVs one for fixed one for switched?

   Example:

   Suppose we have a typical 2-degree 40 channel ROADM. In addition to
   its two line side ports it has 80 add and 80 drop ports. The picture
   below illustrates how a typical 2-degree ROADM system that works with
   bi-directional fiber pairs is a highly asymmetrical system composed
   of two unidirectional ROADM subsystems.







   Bernstein and Lee Expires May 3, 2009  [Page 6]


Internet-Draft   Wavelength Switched Optical Networks     November 2008


                         (Tributary) Ports #3-#42
                     Ingress added to    Egress dropped from
                     West Line Egress    East Line Ingress
                           vvvvv          ^^^^^
                          | |||.|        | |||.|
                    +-----| |||.|--------| |||.|------+
                    |    +----------------------+     |
                    |    |                      |     |
        Egress      |    | Unidirectional ROADM |     |    Ingress
   -----------------+    |                      |     +--------------
   <=====================|                      |===================<
   -----------------+    +----------------------+     +--------------
                    |                                 |
        Port #1     |                                 |   Port #2
   (West Line Side) |                                 |(East Line Side)
   -----------------+    +----------------------+     +--------------
   >=====================|                      |===================>
   -----------------+    | Unidirectional ROADM |     +--------------
        Ingress     |    |                      |     |    Egress
                    |    |              _       |     |
                    |    +----------------------+     |
                    +-----| |||.|--------| |||.|------+
                          | |||.|        | |||.|
                           vvvvv          ^^^^^
                     (Tributary) Ports #43-#82
                Egress dropped from    Ingress added to
                West Line ingress      East Line egress


   Referring to the figure we see that the ingress direction of ports
   #3-#42 (add ports) can only connect to the egress on port #1. While
   the ingress side of port #2 (line side) can only connect to the
   egress on ports #3-#42 (drop) and to the egress on port #1 (pass
   through). Similarly, the ingress direction of ports #43-#82 can only
   connect to the egress on port #2 (line). While the ingress direction
   of port #1 can only connect to the egress on ports #43-#82 (drop) or
   port #2 (pass through). We can now represent this potential
   connectivity matrix as follows. This representation uses only 30 32-
   bit words.











   Bernstein and Lee Expires May 3, 2009  [Page 7]


Internet-Draft   Wavelength Switched Optical Networks     November 2008



       0                   1                   2                   3
       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
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |    Conn = 1   |                 Reserved                      |1
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
                          Note: adds to line
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |  Action=2     |0 1|0 0 0 0 0 0|Reserved(Note:inclusive range) |2
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                     Link Local Identifier = #3                |3
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                     Link Local Identifier = #42               |4
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |  Action=0     |1 0|0 0 0 0 0 0|Reserved (Note:inclusive list) |5
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                     Link Local Identifier = #1                |6
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
                       Note: line to drops
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |  Action=0     |0 1|0 0 0 0 0 0|Reserved (Note:inclusive list) |7
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                     Link Local Identifier = #2                |8
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |  Action=2     |1 0|0 0 0 0 0 0|Reserved(Note: inclusive range)|9
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                     Link Local Identifier = #3                |10
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                     Link Local Identifier = #42               |11
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
                       Note: line to line
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |  Action=0     |0 1|0 0 0 0 0 0|Reserved (Note:inclusive list) |12
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                     Link Local Identifier = #2                |13
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |  Action=0     |1 0|0 0 0 0 0 0|Reserved(Note: inclusive range)|14
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                     Link Local Identifier = #1                |15
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
                                Note: adds to line
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |  Action=2     |0 1|0 0 0 0 0 0|Reserved(Note:inclusive range) |16
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                     Link Local Identifier = #42               |17
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                     Link Local Identifier = #82               |18
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


   Bernstein and Lee Expires May 3, 2009  [Page 8]


Internet-Draft   Wavelength Switched Optical Networks     November 2008


     |  Action=0     |1 0|0 0 0 0 0 0|Reserved (Note:inclusive list) |19
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                     Link Local Identifier = #2                |20
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
                       Note: line to drops
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |  Action=0     |0 1|0 0 0 0 0 0|Reserved (Note:inclusive list) |21
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                     Link Local Identifier = #1                |22
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |  Action=2     |1 0|0 0 0 0 0 0|Reserved(Note: inclusive range)|23
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                     Link Local Identifier = #43               |24
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                     Link Local Identifier = #82               |25
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
                       Note: line to line
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |  Action=0     |0 1|0 0 0 0 0 0|Reserved (Note:inclusive list) |26
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                     Link Local Identifier = #1                |27
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |  Action=0     |1 0|0 0 0 0 0 0|Reserved(Note: inclusive range)|28
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                     Link Local Identifier = #2                |30
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

3.3. Wavelength Information Encoding

   This document makes frequent use of the lambda label format defined
   in [Otani] shown below strictly for reference purposes:

      0                   1                   2                   3
      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
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |Grid |  C.S. |S|  Reserved     |               n               |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   Where

   Grid is used to indicate which ITU-T grid specification is being
   used.

   C.S. = Channel spacing used in a DWDM system, i.e., with a ITU-T
   G.694.1 grid.

   S = sign of the offset from the center frequency of 193.1THz for the
   ITU-T G.694.1 grid.



   Bernstein and Lee Expires May 3, 2009  [Page 9]


Internet-Draft   Wavelength Switched Optical Networks     November 2008


   n = Used to specify the frequency as 193.1THz +/- n*(channel spacing)
   where the + or - is chosen based on the sign (S) bit.

3.4. Wavelength Set Sub-TLV

   Wavelength sets come up frequently in WSONs to describe the range of
   a laser transmitter, the wavelength restrictions on ROADM ports, or
   the availability of wavelengths on a DWDM link. The general format
   for a wavelength set is given below. This format uses the Action
   concept from [RFC3471] with an additional Action to define a "bit
   map" type of label set. Note that the second 32 bit field is a lambda
   label in the previously defined format. This provides important
   information on the WDM grid type and channel spacing that will be
   used in the compact encodings listed.

      0                   1                   2                   3
      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
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     | Action        |   Reserved    |    Num Wavelengths            |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |Grid |  C.S. |S|  Reserved     |  n  for lowest frequency      |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |     Additional fields as necessary per action                 |
     |



   Action:

   0 - Inclusive List

   1 - Exclusive List

   2 - Inclusive Range

   3 - Exclusive Range

   4 - Bitmap Set

   3.4.1. Inclusive/Exclusive Wavelength Lists

   In the case of the inclusive/exclusive lists the wavelength set
   format is given by:







   Bernstein and Lee Expires May 3, 2009  [Page 10]


Internet-Draft   Wavelength Switched Optical Networks     November 2008


      0                   1                   2                   3
      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
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |Action=0 or 1  | Reserved      |      Num Wavelengths          |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |Grid |  C.S. |S|    Reserved   |    n  for lowest frequency    |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |    n2                         |          n3                   |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     :                                                               :
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |    nm                         |                                |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   Where Num Wavelengths tells us the number of wavelength in this
   inclusive or exclusive list this does not include the initial
   wavelength in the list hence if the number of wavelengths is odd then
   zero padding of the last half word is required.

   3.4.2. Inclusive/Exclusive Wavelength Ranges

   In the case of inclusive/exclusive ranges the wavelength set format
   is given by:

      0                   1                   2                   3
      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
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |Action=2 or 3  | Reserved      |      Num Wavelengths          |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |Grid |  C.S. |S|  Reserved     |      n  for lowest frequency  |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   In this case Num Wavelengths specifies the number of wavelengths in
   the range starting at the given wavelength and incrementing the Num
   Wavelengths number of channel spacing up in frequency (regardless of
   the value of the sign bit).

   3.4.3. Bitmap Wavelength Set

   In the case of Action = 4, the bitmap the wavelength set format is
   given by:










   Bernstein and Lee Expires May 3, 2009  [Page 11]


Internet-Draft   Wavelength Switched Optical Networks     November 2008


      0                   1                   2                   3
      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
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     | Action = 4    | Reserved    |      Num Wavelengths            |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |Grid |  C.S. |S|  Reserved   |      n  for lowest frequency    |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |    Bit Map Word #1 (Lowest frequency channels)                |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     :                                                               :
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |    Bit Map Word #N (Highest frequency channels)               |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


   Where Num Wavelengths in this case tells us the number of wavelengths
   represented by the bit map. Each bit in the bit map represents a
   particular frequency with a value of 1/0 indicating whether the
   frequency is in the set or not. Bit position zero represents the
   lowest frequency, while each succeeding bit position represents the
   next frequency a channel spacing (C.S.) above the previous.

   The size of the bit map is clearly Num Wavelengths bits, but the bit
   map is made up to a full multiple of 32 bits so that the TLV is a
   multiple of four bytes. Bits that do not represent wavelengths (i.e.,
   those in positions (Num Wavelengths - 1) and beyond) SHOULD be set to
   zero and MUST be ignored.

   Example:

   A 40 channel C-Band DWDM system with 100GHz spacing with lowest
   frequency 192.0THz (1561.4nm) and highest frequency 195.9THz
   (1530.3nm). These frequencies correspond to n = -11, and n = 28
   respectively. Now suppose the following channels are available:

   Frequency (THz)    n Value      bit map position
   --------------------------------------------------
      192.0             -11               0
      192.5              -6               5
      193.1               0              11
      193.9               8              19
      194.0               9              20
      195.2              21              32
      195.8              27              38

   With the Grid value set to indicate an ITU-T G.694.1 DWDM grid, C.S.
   set to indicate 100GHz, and with S (sign) set to indicate negative
   this lambda bit map set would then be encoded as follows:


   Bernstein and Lee Expires May 3, 2009  [Page 12]


Internet-Draft   Wavelength Switched Optical Networks     November 2008




      0                   1                   2                   3
      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
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     | Action = 4    | Reserved      |    Num Wavelengths = 40       |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |Grid |  C.S. |S|    Reserved   | n  for lowest frequency = -11 |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0|   Not used in 40 Channel system (all zeros)   |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+



3.5. Port Wavelength Restriction sub-TLV

   The port wavelength restriction of [WSON-Info] can be encoded as a
   sub-TLV as follows.

      0                   1                   2                   3
      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
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |RestrictionKind|T|  Reserved   |     MaxNumChannels            |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
                  --Wavelength Set--
     | Action        |   Reserved    |    Num Wavelengths            |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |Grid |  C.S. |S|  Reserved     |  n  for lowest frequency      |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |     Additional fields as necessary per action                 |
     |                                                               |


   RestrictionKind can take the following values and meanings:

   0:   Simple wavelength selective restriction. Max number of channels
   indicates the number of wavelengths permitted on the port and the
   accompanying wavelength set indicates the permitted values.

   1:   Waveband device with a tunable center frequency and passband. In
   this case the maximum number of channels indicates the maximum width
   of the waveband in terms of the channels spacing given in the
   wavelength set. The corresponding wavelength set is used to indicate
   the overall tuning range. Specific center frequency tuning
   information can be obtained from dynamic channel in use information.



   Bernstein and Lee Expires May 3, 2009  [Page 13]


Internet-Draft   Wavelength Switched Optical Networks     November 2008


   It is assumed that both center frequency and bandwidth (Q) tuning can
   be done without causing faults in existing signals.

   Values for T include:

   0 == Use with a fixed connectivity matrix

   1 == Use with a switched connectivity matrix

   TBD: Should we just have two flavors of sub-TLV then?

4. Composite TLVs

   The Four composite TLVs in the following sections are based on the
   four high level information bundles of [WSON-Info].

4.1. WSON Node TLV

   The WSON Node TLV consists of the following ordered list of sub-TLVs:

   <Node_Info> ::= <Node_ID> [<SwitchedConnectivityMatrix>]
   [<FixedConnectivityMatrix>], [<SRNG>] [<WavelengthConverterPool>]

   o  Node ID (This will be derived from standard IETF node identifiers)

   o  Switch Connectivity Matrix - (optional) This is a connectivity
      matrix sub-TLV with the connectivity type set to "switched" (conn
      = 1)

   o  Fixed Connectivity Matrix - (optional) This is a connectivity
      matrix sub-TLV with the connectivity type set to "fixed" (conn =
      0).

   o  Shared Risk Node Group - (optional) Format TBD.

   o  Wavelength Converter Pool - (optional) Format TBD.





4.2. WSON Link TLV

   Note that a number of sub-TLVs for links have already been defined
   and it is for further study if we can or should reuse any of those
   sub-TLVs in our encoding. Note that for a system already employing
   GMPLS based routing the existing encodings and transport mechanisms
   should be used and the information does not need to appear twice.


   Bernstein and Lee Expires May 3, 2009  [Page 14]


Internet-Draft   Wavelength Switched Optical Networks     November 2008


   <LinkInfo> ::=  <LinkID> [<AdministrativeGroup>] [<InterfaceCapDesc>]
   [<Protection>] [<SRLG>]... [<TrafficEngineeringMetric>]
   [<MaximumBandwidthPerChannel>] <[SwitchedPortWavelengthRestriction>]
   [<FixedPortWavelengthRestriction>]

   o  Link Identifier - Need to double check on this with RFC4203
      (required).

   o  Administrative Group - (optional) Standard sub-TLV type 9,
      RFC3630.

   o  Interface Switching Capability Descriptor - Standard sub-TLV type
      15, RFC4203.

   o  Protection - (optional) Standard sub-TLV type 15, RFC4203.

   o  Shared Risk Link Group - (optional) Standard sub-TLV 16, RFC4203.

   o  Traffic Engineering Metric - (optional) Standard sub-TLV type 5,
      RFC3630.

   o  Maximum Bandwidth per Channel - TBD.

   o  Switched Port Wavelength Restriction - (optional) The port
      wavelength restriction sub-TLV with T = 1.

   o  Fixed Port Wavelength Restriction - (optional) The port wavelength
      restriction sub-TLV with T = 0.

4.3. WSON Dynamic Link TLV

   <DynamicLinkInfo> ::=  <LinkID> <AvailableWavelengths>
   [<SharedBackupWavelengths>]

   Where

   <LinkID> ::= <LocalLinkID> <LocalNodeID> <RemoteLinkID>
   <RemoteNodeID>

   o  Available Wavelengths - A wavelength set sub-TLV used to indicate
      which wavelengths are available on this link.

   o  Shared Backup Wavelengths - (optional) A wavelength set sub-TLV
      used to indicate which wavelengths on this link are currently used
      for shared backup protection (and hence can possibly be reused).





   Bernstein and Lee Expires May 3, 2009  [Page 15]


Internet-Draft   Wavelength Switched Optical Networks     November 2008


4.4. WSON Dynamic Node TLV

   <NodeInfoDynamic> ::= <NodeID> [<WCPoolState>]

   o  Node ID - Format TBD.

   o  Wavelength Converter Pool Status - (optional) Format TBD.

   Note that currently the only dynamic information modeled with a node
   is associated with the status of the wavelength converter pool.

5. Security Considerations

   This document defines protocol-independent encodings for WSON
   information and does not introduce any security issues.

   However, other documents that make use of these encodings within
   protocol extensions need to consider the issues and risks associated
   with, inspection, interception, modification, or spoofing of any of
   this information. It is expected that any such documents will
   describe the necessary security measures to provide adequate
   protection.

6. IANA Considerations

   TBD. Once our approach is finalized we may need identifiers for the
   various TLVs and sub-TLVs.

7. Acknowledgments

   This document was prepared using 2-Word-v2.0.template.dot.



















   Bernstein and Lee Expires May 3, 2009  [Page 16]


Internet-Draft   Wavelength Switched Optical Networks     November 2008




8. References

8.1. Normative References

   [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
             Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [RFC2863] McCloghrie, K. and F. Kastenholz, "The Interfaces Group
             MIB", RFC 2863, June 2000.

   [RFC3471] Berger, L., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
             (GMPLS) Signaling Functional Description", RFC 3471,
             January 2003.

   [G.694.1] ITU-T Recommendation G.694.1, "Spectral grids for WDM
             applications: DWDM frequency grid", June, 2002.

   [RFC4202] Kompella, K., Ed., and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "Routing Extensions
             in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
             (GMPLS)", RFC 4202, October 2005

   [RFC4203] Kompella, K., Ed., and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "OSPF Extensions in
             Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
             (GMPLS)", RFC 4203, October 2005.

   [Otani]   T. Otani, H. Guo, K. Miyazaki, D. Caviglia, "Generalized
             Labels for G.694 Lambda-Switching Capable Label Switching
             Routers", work in progress: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g-694-
             lambda-labels-02.txt, July 2008.



8.2. Informative References

   [G.694.1] ITU-T Recommendation G.694.1, Spectral grids for WDM
             applications: DWDM frequency grid, June 2002.

   [G.694.2] ITU-T Recommendation G.694.2, Spectral grids for WDM
             applications: CWDM wavelength grid, December 2003.

   [RFC5307] Kompella, K., Ed., and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "IS-IS Extensions
             in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
             (GMPLS)", RFC 5307, October 2008.





   Bernstein and Lee Expires May 3, 2009  [Page 17]


Internet-Draft   Wavelength Switched Optical Networks     November 2008


   [Switch] G. Bernstein, Y. Lee, A. Gavler, J. Martensson, " Modeling
         WDM Wavelength Switching Systems for use in Automated Path
         Computation", http://www.grotto-
         networking.com/wson/ModelingWSONswitchesV2a.pdf , June, 2008

   [WSON-Frame] G. Bernstein, Y. Lee, W. Imajuku, "Framework for GMPLS
             and PCE Control of Wavelength Switched Optical Networks",
             work in progress: draft-ietf-ccamp-wavelength-switched-
             framework-01.txt, July 2008.

   [WSON-Info] G. Bernstein, Y. Lee, D. Li, W. Imajuku, "Routing and
             Wavelength Assignment Information Model for Wavelength
             Switched Optical Networks", work in progress: draft-ietf-
             ccamp-rwa-info-01.txt, October 2008.

   [PCEP]    Vasseur, JP., Ed. and JL. Le Roux, Ed., "Path Computation
             Element (PCE) communication Protocol (PCEP) - Version 1",
             draft-ietf-pce-pcep, work in progress.
































   Bernstein and Lee Expires May 3, 2009  [Page 18]


Internet-Draft   Wavelength Switched Optical Networks     November 2008


9. Contributors

   Diego Caviglia
   Ericsson
   Via A. Negrone 1/A 16153
   Genoa Italy

   Phone: +39 010 600 3736
   Email: diego.caviglia@(marconi.com, ericsson.com)

   Anders Gavler
   Acreo AB
   Electrum 236
   SE - 164 40 Kista Sweden

   Email: Anders.Gavler@acreo.se

   Jonas Martensson
   Acreo AB
   Electrum 236
   SE - 164 40 Kista, Sweden

   Email: Jonas.Martensson@acreo.se

   Itaru Nishioka
   NEC Corp.
   1753 Simonumabe, Nakahara-ku, Kawasaki, Kanagawa 211-8666
   Japan

   Phone: +81 44 396 3287
   Email: i-nishioka@cb.jp.nec.com



Authors' Addresses

   Greg M. Bernstein (ed.)
   Grotto Networking
   Fremont California, USA

   Phone: (510) 573-2237
   Email: gregb@grotto-networking.com








   Bernstein and Lee Expires May 3, 2009  [Page 19]


Internet-Draft   Wavelength Switched Optical Networks     November 2008


   Young Lee (ed.)
   Huawei Technologies
   1700 Alma Drive, Suite 100
   Plano, TX 75075
   USA

   Phone: (972) 509-5599 (x2240)
   Email: ylee@huawei.com


   Dan Li
   Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
   F3-5-B R&D Center, Huawei Base,
   Bantian, Longgang District
   Shenzhen 518129 P.R.China

   Phone: +86-755-28973237
   Email: danli@huawei.com

   Wataru Imajuku
   NTT Network Innovation Labs
   1-1 Hikari-no-oka, Yokosuka, Kanagawa
   Japan

   Phone: +81-(46) 859-4315
   Email: imajuku.wataru@lab.ntt.co.jp



Intellectual Property Statement

   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
   Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
   pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
   this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
   might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
   made any independent effort to identify any such rights.  Information
   on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
   found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
   assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
   attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
   such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
   specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
   http://www.ietf.org/ipr.




   Bernstein and Lee Expires May 3, 2009  [Page 20]


Internet-Draft   Wavelength Switched Optical Networks     November 2008


   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
   rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
   this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at
   ietf-ipr@ietf.org.

Disclaimer of Validity

   This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
   OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND
   THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS
   OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF
   THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
   WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008).

   This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
   contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
   retain all their rights.

Acknowledgment

   Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
   Internet Society.






















   Bernstein and Lee Expires May 3, 2009  [Page 21]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129d, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/