draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode-00.txt   draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode-01.txt 
Network Working Group G. Bernstein Network Working Group G. Bernstein
Internet Draft Grotto Networking Internet Draft Grotto Networking
Intended status: Standards Track Y. Lee Intended status: Standards Track Y. Lee
Expires: August 2010 D. Li Expires: September 2010 D. Li
Huawei Huawei
W. Imajuku W. Imajuku
NTT NTT
February 18, 2010 March 2, 2010
General Network Element Constraint Encoding for GMPLS Controlled General Network Element Constraint Encoding for GMPLS Controlled
Networks Networks
draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode-00.txt draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode-01.txt
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts. Drafts.
skipping to change at page 1, line 38 skipping to change at page 1, line 38
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
This Internet-Draft will expire on August 18, 2010. This Internet-Draft will expire on September 2, 2010.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Abstract Abstract
Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching can be used to control a Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching can be used to control a
wide variety of technologies. In some of these technologies network wide variety of technologies. In some of these technologies network
elements and links may impose additional routing constraints. An elements and links may impose additional routing constraints such as
example of such additional constraints occurs in wavelength switched asymmetric switch connectivity, label limitation and label
optical networks (WSON). availability on links.
This document provides efficient, protocol-agnostic encodings for This document provides efficient, protocol-agnostic encodings for
general information elements representing connectivity and label general information elements representing connectivity and label
constraints as well as label availability. These encodings are constraints as well as label availability. These encodings are
applicable to a wide range of technologies and not limited to WSON. applicable to a wide range of technologies and not limited to WSON.
It is intended that protocol-specific documents will reference this It is intended that protocol-specific documents will reference this
memo to describe how information is carried for specific uses. memo to describe how information is carried for specific uses.
Conventions used in this document Conventions used in this document
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC-2119 [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in RFC-2119 [RFC2119].
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction...................................................3 1. Introduction...................................................3
2. Terminology....................................................4 2. Extension Encoding Usage Recommendations.......................4
3. Extension Encoding Usage Recommendations.......................4 2.1. Extension Node TLV........................................4
3.1. Extension Node TLV........................................4 2.2. Extension Link TLV........................................4
3.2. Extension Link TLV........................................4 2.3. Extension Dynamic Link TLV................................4
3.3. Extension Dynamic Link TLV................................5 3. Link Set Field.................................................4
4. Link Set Field.................................................5 4. Label Set Field................................................6
5. Label Set Field................................................7 4.1. Inclusive/Exclusive Label Lists...........................7
5.1. Inclusive/Exclusive Label Lists...........................8 4.2. Inclusive/Exclusive Label Ranges..........................8
5.2. Inclusive/Exclusive Label Ranges..........................8 4.3. Bitmap Label Set..........................................8
5.3. Bitmap Label Set..........................................9
6. Label and Connectivity sub-TLV Encodings......................10 5. Label and Connectivity sub-TLV Encodings.......................9
6.1. Available Labels Sub-TLV.................................10 5.1. Available Labels Sub-TLV..................................9
6.2. Shared Backup Labels Sub-TLV.............................10 5.2. Shared Backup Labels Sub-TLV.............................10
6.3. Connectivity Matrix Sub-TLV..............................11 5.3. Connectivity Matrix Sub-TLV..............................10
6.4. Port Label Restriction sub-TLV...........................12 5.4. Port Label Restriction sub-TLV...........................12
6.4.1. SIMPLE_LABEL........................................13 5.4.1. SIMPLE_LABEL........................................13
6.4.2. CHANNEL_COUNT.......................................13 5.4.2. CHANNEL_COUNT.......................................13
6.4.3. WAVEBAND1...........................................13 5.4.3. LABEL_RANGE1........................................13
6.4.4. SIMPLE_LABEL & CHANNEL_COUNT........................14 5.4.4. SIMPLE_LABEL & CHANNEL_COUNT........................14
7. Security Considerations.......................................14 6. Security Considerations.......................................14
8. IANA Considerations...........................................15 7. IANA Considerations...........................................15
9. Acknowledgments...............................................15 8. Acknowledgments...............................................15
APPENDIX A: Encoding Examples....................................16 APPENDIX A: Encoding Examples....................................16
A.1. Link Set Field...........................................16 A.1. Link Set Field...........................................16
A.2. Label Set Field..........................................16 A.2. Label Set Field..........................................16
A.3. Connectivity Matrix Sub-TLV..............................17 A.3. Connectivity Matrix Sub-TLV..............................17
A.4. Connectivity Matrix with Bi-directional Symmetry.........20 A.4. Connectivity Matrix with Bi-directional Symmetry.........20
10. References...................................................23 9. References....................................................23
10.1. Normative References....................................23 9.1. Normative References.....................................23
10.2. Informative References..................................23 9.2. Informative References...................................23
11. Contributors.................................................25 10. Contributors.................................................25
Authors' Addresses...............................................25 Authors' Addresses...............................................25
Intellectual Property Statement..................................26 Intellectual Property Statement..................................26
Disclaimer of Validity...........................................27 Disclaimer of Validity...........................................27
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
Some data plane technologies that wish to make use of a GMPLS control Some data plane technologies that wish to make use of a GMPLS control
plane contain additional constraints on switching capability and plane contain additional constraints on switching capability and
label assignment. In addition, some of these technologies must label assignment. In addition, some of these technologies must
perform non-local label assignment based on the nature of the perform non-local label assignment based on the nature of the
technology, e.g., wavelength continuity constraint in WSON [WSON- technology, e.g., wavelength continuity constraint in WSON [WSON-
Frame]. Such constraints can lead to the requirement for link by link Frame]. Such constraints can lead to the requirement for link by link
label availability in path computation and label assignment. label availability in path computation and label assignment.
This document provides efficient encodings of information needed by This document provides efficient encodings of information needed by
skipping to change at page 4, line 9 skipping to change at page 4, line 5
but that are potentially applicable to a wider range of technologies. but that are potentially applicable to a wider range of technologies.
Such encodings can be used to extend GMPLS signaling and routing Such encodings can be used to extend GMPLS signaling and routing
protocols. In addition these encodings could be used by other protocols. In addition these encodings could be used by other
mechanisms to convey this same information to a path computation mechanisms to convey this same information to a path computation
element (PCE). element (PCE).
Encodings of information needed by the routing and wavelength Encodings of information needed by the routing and wavelength
assignment (RWA) process unique to WSON is addressed in a separate assignment (RWA) process unique to WSON is addressed in a separate
document [WSON-Encode]. document [WSON-Encode].
2. Terminology 2. Extension Encoding Usage Recommendations
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.
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. Extension Encoding Usage Recommendations
In this section we give recommendations of typical usage of the sub- In this section we give recommendations of typical usage of the sub-
TLVs and composite TLVs which are based on four high level TLVs and composite TLVs.
information bundles of [WSON-Info].
3.1. Extension Node TLV 2.1. Extension Node TLV
The Extension Node TLV could consist of the following list of sub- The Extension Node TLV could consist of the following list of sub-
TLVs: TLVs:
<Node_Info> ::= <Node_ID>[Other GMPLS sub- <Node_Info> ::= <Node_ID>[Other GMPLS sub-
TLVs][<ConnectivityMatrix>...] TLVs][<ConnectivityMatrix>...]
3.2. Extension Link TLV 2.2. Extension Link TLV
The new link related sub-TLVs could be incorporated into a composite The new link related sub-TLVs could be incorporated into a composite
link TLV as follows: link TLV as follows:
<LinkInfo> ::= <LinkID> [Other GMPLS sub-TLVs] <LinkInfo> ::= <LinkID> [Other GMPLS sub-TLVs]
[<PortLabelRestriction>...][<AvailableLabels>] [<SharedBackupLabels>] [<PortLabelRestriction>...][<AvailableLabels>] [<SharedBackupLabels>]
3.3. Extension Dynamic Link TLV 2.3. Extension Dynamic Link TLV
If the protocol supports the separation of dynamic information from If the protocol supports the separation of dynamic information from
relatively static information then the available wavelength and relatively static information then the available wavelength and
shared backup status can be separated from the general link TLV into shared backup status can be separated from the general link TLV into
a TLV for dynamic link information. a TLV for dynamic link information.
<DynamicLinkInfo> ::= <LinkID> <AvailableLabels> <DynamicLinkInfo> ::= <LinkID> <AvailableLabels>
[<SharedBackupLabels>] [<SharedBackupLabels>]
4. Link Set Field 3. Link Set Field
We will frequently need to describe properties of groups of links. To 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 do so efficiently we can make use of a link set concept similar to
the label set concept of [RFC3471]. This Link Set Field is used in the label set concept of [RFC3471]. This Link Set Field is used in
the <ConnectivityMatrix> sub-TLV, which is defined in Section 6.3. the <ConnectivityMatrix> sub-TLV, which is defined in Section 6.3.
The information carried in a Link Set is defined by: The information carried in a Link Set is defined by:
0 1 2 3 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 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
skipping to change at page 6, line 18 skipping to change at page 5, line 43
portion of the range. Note that the Action field can be set to portion of the range. Note that the Action field can be set to
0x02(Inclusive Range) only when unnumbered link identifier is used. 0x02(Inclusive Range) only when unnumbered link identifier is used.
Dir: Directionality of the Link Set (2 bits) Dir: Directionality of the Link Set (2 bits)
0 -- bidirectional 0 -- bidirectional
1 -- ingress 1 -- ingress
2 -- egress 2 -- egress
In optical networks we think in terms of unidirectional as well as For example in optical networks we think in terms of unidirectional
bidirectional links. For example, label restrictions or connectivity as well as bidirectional links. For example, label restrictions or
may be different for an ingress port, than for its "companion" egress connectivity may be different for an ingress port, than for its
port if one exists. Note that "interfaces" such as those discussed in "companion" egress port if one exists. Note that "interfaces" such as
the Interfaces MIB [RFC2863] are assumed to be bidirectional. This those discussed in the Interfaces MIB [RFC2863] are assumed to be
also applies to the links advertised in various link state routing bidirectional. This also applies to the links advertised in various
protocols. link state routing protocols.
Format: The format of the link identifier (6 bits) Format: The format of the link identifier (6 bits)
0 -- Link Local Identifier 0 -- Link Local Identifier
Indicates that the links in the Link Set are identified by link local Indicates that the links in the Link Set are identified by link local
identifiers. All link local identifiers are supplied in the context identifiers. All link local identifiers are supplied in the context
of the advertising node. of the advertising node.
1 -- Local Interface IPv4 Address 1 -- Local Interface IPv4 Address
skipping to change at page 7, line 13 skipping to change at page 6, line 38
Length: 16 bits Length: 16 bits
This field indicates the total length in bytes of the Link Set field. This field indicates the total length in bytes of the Link Set field.
Link Identifier: length is dependent on the link format Link Identifier: length is dependent on the link format
The link identifier represents the port which is being described The link identifier represents the port which is being described
either for connectivity or label restrictions. This can be the link either for connectivity or label restrictions. This can be the link
local identifier of [RFC4202], GMPLS routing, [RFC4203] GMPLS OSPF local identifier of [RFC4202], GMPLS routing, [RFC4203] GMPLS OSPF
routing, and [RFC5307] IS-IS GMPLS routing. The use of the link local routing, and [RFC5307] IS-IS GMPLS routing. The use of the link local
identifier format can result in more compact WSON encodings when the identifier format can result in more compact encodings when the
assignments are done in a reasonable fashion. assignments are done in a reasonable fashion.
5. Label Set Field 4. Label Set Field
Label sets come up frequently in WSONs to describe the range of a Label Set Field is used within the <AvailableLabels> sub-TLV or the
laser transmitter, the wavelength restrictions on ROADM ports, or the <SharedBackupLabels> sub-TLV, which is defined in Section 6.1 and
availability of wavelengths on a DWDM link. Label Set Field is used 6.2, respectively.
within the <AvailableLabels> sub-TLV or the <SharedBackupLabels> sub-
TLV, which is defined in Section 6.1 and 6.2, respectively.
The general format for a label set is given below. This format uses The general format for a label set is given below. This format uses
the Action concept from [RFC3471] with an additional Action to define the Action concept from [RFC3471] with an additional Action to define
a "bit map" type of label set. The second 32 bit field is a base a "bit map" type of label set. The second 32 bit field is a base
label used as a starting point in many of the specific formats. In label used as a starting point in many of the specific formats.
the case of WSONs this provides important information on the WDM grid
type and channel spacing.
0 1 2 3 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 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| Num Labels | Length | | Action| Num Labels | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Base Label | | Base Label |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Additional fields as necessary per action | | Additional fields as necessary per action |
| |
skipping to change at page 8, line 14 skipping to change at page 7, line 35
3 - Exclusive Range 3 - Exclusive Range
4 - Bitmap Set 4 - Bitmap Set
Num Labels is only meaningful for Action value of 4 (Bitmap Set). It Num Labels is only meaningful for Action value of 4 (Bitmap Set). It
indicates the number of labels represented by the bit map. See more indicates the number of labels represented by the bit map. See more
detail in section 3.2.3. detail in section 3.2.3.
Length is the length in bytes of the entire field. Length is the length in bytes of the entire field.
5.1. Inclusive/Exclusive Label Lists 4.1. Inclusive/Exclusive Label Lists
In the case of the inclusive/exclusive lists the wavelength set In the case of the inclusive/exclusive lists the wavelength set
format is given by: format is given by:
0 1 2 3 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 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0 or 1 | Num Labels (not used) | Length | |0 or 1 | Num Labels (not used) | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Base Label | | Base Label |
skipping to change at page 8, line 37 skipping to change at page 8, line 23
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Last Label | | Last Label |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Where: Where:
Num Labels is not used in this particular format since the Length Num Labels is not used in this particular format since the Length
parameter is sufficient to determine the number of labels in the parameter is sufficient to determine the number of labels in the
list. list.
5.2. Inclusive/Exclusive Label Ranges 4.2. Inclusive/Exclusive Label Ranges
In the case of inclusive/exclusive ranges the label set format is In the case of inclusive/exclusive ranges the label set format is
given by: given by:
0 1 2 3 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 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|2 or 3 | Num Labels(not used) | Length | |2 or 3 | Num Labels(not used) | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Start Label | | Start Label |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| End Label | | End Label |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Note that the start and end label must in some sense "compatible" in Note that the start and end label must in some sense "compatible" in
the technology being used. For example in WSONs the labels must be of the technology being used.
the same general type (DWDM versus CWDM), and the channel spacings
must be the same.
5.3. Bitmap Label Set 4.3. Bitmap Label Set
In the case of Action = 4, the bitmap the label set format is given In the case of Action = 4, the bitmap the label set format is given
by: by:
0 1 2 3 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 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| 4 | Num Labels | Length | | 4 | Num Labels | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Base Label | | Base Label |
skipping to change at page 10, line 8 skipping to change at page 9, line 32
in the set or not. Bit position zero represents the lowest label and in the set or not. Bit position zero represents the lowest label and
corresponds to the base label, while each succeeding bit position corresponds to the base label, while each succeeding bit position
represents the next label logically above the previous. represents the next label logically above the previous.
The size of the bit map is Num Label bits, but the bit map is padded The size of the bit map is Num Label bits, but the bit map is padded
out to a full multiple of 32 bits so that the TLV is a multiple of out to a full multiple of 32 bits so that the TLV is a multiple of
four bytes. Bits that do not represent labels (i.e., those in four bytes. Bits that do not represent labels (i.e., those in
positions (Num Labels) and beyond SHOULD be set to zero and MUST be positions (Num Labels) and beyond SHOULD be set to zero and MUST be
ignored. ignored.
6. Label and Connectivity sub-TLV Encodings 5. Label and Connectivity sub-TLV Encodings
A type-length-value (TLV) encoding of the general connectivity and A type-length-value (TLV) encoding of the general connectivity and
label restrictions and availability extensions is given in the label restrictions and availability extensions is given in the
following sections. This encoding is designed to be suitable for use 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 GMPLS routing protocols OSPF [RFC4203] and IS-IS [RFC5307] and
in the PCE protocol PCEP [PCEP]. Note that the information in the PCE protocol PCEP [PCEP]. Note that the information
distributed in [RFC4203] and [RFC5307] is arranged via the nesting of distributed in [RFC4203] and [RFC5307] is arranged via the nesting of
sub-TLVs within TLVs and this document makes use of such constructs. sub-TLVs within TLVs and this document makes use of such constructs.
6.1. Available Labels Sub-TLV 5.1. Available Labels Sub-TLV
To indicate the labels available for use on a link the Available To indicate the labels available for use on a link the Available
Labels sub-TLV consists of a single variable length label set field Labels sub-TLV consists of a single variable length label set field
as follows: as follows:
0 1 2 3 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 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Label Set Field | | Label Set Field |
: : : :
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Note that Label Set Field is defined in Section 3.2. Note that Label Set Field is defined in Section 3.2.
6.2. Shared Backup Labels Sub-TLV 5.2. Shared Backup Labels Sub-TLV
To indicate the labels available for shared backup use on a link the To indicate the labels available for shared backup use on a link the
Shared Backup Labels sub-TLV consists of a single variable length Shared Backup Labels sub-TLV consists of a single variable length
label set field as follows: label set field as follows:
0 1 2 3 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 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Label Set Field | | Label Set Field |
: : : :
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
6.3. Connectivity Matrix Sub-TLV 5.3. Connectivity Matrix Sub-TLV
The switch and fixed connectivity matrices of [WSON-Info] can be The switch and fixed connectivity matrices of [WSON-Info] can be
compactly represented in terms of a minimal list of ingress and compactly represented in terms of a minimal list of ingress and
egress port set pairs that have mutual connectivity. As described in egress port set pairs that have mutual connectivity. As described in
[Switch] such a minimal list representation leads naturally to a [Switch] such a minimal list representation leads naturally to a
graph representation for path computation purposes that involves the graph representation for path computation purposes that involves the
fewest additional nodes and links. fewest additional nodes and links.
A TLV encoding of this list of link set pairs is: A TLV encoding of this list of link set pairs is:
skipping to change at page 12, line 15 skipping to change at page 12, line 5
any signal that ingresses a link in set A can be potentially any signal that ingresses a link in set A can be potentially
switched out of an egress link in set B. switched out of an egress link in set B.
o Link Set A dir=bidirectional, Link Set B dir=bidirectional o Link Set A dir=bidirectional, Link Set B dir=bidirectional
The meaning of the pair of link sets A and B in this case is that The meaning of the pair of link sets A and B in this case is that
any signal that ingresses on the links in set A can potentially any signal that ingresses on the links in set A can potentially
egress on a link in set B, and any ingress signal on the links in egress on a link in set B, and any ingress signal on the links in
set B can potentially egress on a link in set A. set B can potentially egress on a link in set A.
See Appendix A for examples of both types of encodings as applied to See Appendix A for both types of encodings as applied to a WSON
a WSON example. example.
6.4. Port Label Restriction sub-TLV 5.4. Port Label Restriction sub-TLV
The port label restriction of [WSON-Info] can be encoded as a sub-TLV The port label restriction of [WSON-Info] can be encoded as a sub-TLV
as follows. More than one of these sub-TLVs may be needed to fully as follows. More than one of these sub-TLVs may be needed to fully
specify a complex port constraint. When more than one of these sub- specify a complex port constraint. When more than one of these sub-
TLVs are present the resulting restriction is the intersection of the TLVs are present the resulting restriction is the intersection of the
restrictions expressed in each sub-TLV. To indicate that a restrictions expressed in each sub-TLV. To indicate that a
restriction applies to the port in general and not to a specific restriction applies to the port in general and not to a specific
connectivity matrix use the reserved value of 0xFF for the MatrixID. connectivity matrix use the reserved value of 0xFF for the MatrixID.
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
skipping to change at page 12, line 45 skipping to change at page 12, line 35
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Where: Where:
MatrixID: either is the value in the corresponding Connectivity MatrixID: either is the value in the corresponding Connectivity
Matrix sub-TLV or takes the value OxFF to indicate the restriction Matrix sub-TLV or takes the value OxFF to indicate the restriction
applies to the port regardless of any Connectivity Matrix. applies to the port regardless of any Connectivity Matrix.
RestrictionType can take the following values and meanings: RestrictionType can take the following values and meanings:
0: SIMPLE_LABEL (Simple wavelength selective restriction) 0: SIMPLE_LABEL (Simple label selective restriction)
1: CHANNEL_COUNT (Channel count restriction) 1: CHANNEL_COUNT (Channel count restriction)
2: WAVEBAND1 (Waveband device with a tunable center frequency
and passband) 2: LABEL_RANGE1 (Label range device with a movable center label
and width)
3: SIMPLE_LABEL & CHANNEL_COUNT (Combination of SIMPLE_LABEL 3: SIMPLE_LABEL & CHANNEL_COUNT (Combination of SIMPLE_LABEL
and CHANNEL_COUNT restriction. The accompanying wavelength set and CHANNEL_COUNT restriction. The accompanying label set and
and channel count indicate wavelength permitted on the port and channel count indicate labels permitted on the port and the
the maximum number of channels that can be simultaneously used maximum number of channels that can be simultaneously used on
on the port) the port)
6.4.1. SIMPLE_LABEL 5.4.1. SIMPLE_LABEL
In the case of the SIMPLE_LABEL the GeneralPortRestrictions (or In the case of the SIMPLE_LABEL the GeneralPortRestrictions (or
MatrixSpecificRestrictions) format is given by: MatrixSpecificRestrictions) format is given by:
0 1 2 3 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 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| MatrixID | RstType = 0 | Reserved | | MatrixID | RstType = 0 | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Label Set Field | | Label Set Field |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
In this case the accompanying label set indicates the labels In this case the accompanying label set indicates the labels
permitted on the port. permitted on the port.
6.4.2. CHANNEL_COUNT 5.4.2. CHANNEL_COUNT
In the case of the CHANNEL_COUNT the format is given by: In the case of the CHANNEL_COUNT the format is given by:
0 1 2 3 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 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| MatrixID | RstType = 1 | MaxNumChannels | | MatrixID | RstType = 1 | MaxNumChannels |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
In this case the accompanying MaxNumChannels indicates the maximum In this case the accompanying MaxNumChannels indicates the maximum
number of channels (labels) that can be simultaneously used on the number of channels (labels) that can be simultaneously used on the
port/matrix. port/matrix.
6.4.3. WAVEBAND1 5.4.3. LABEL_RANGE1
In the case of the WAVEBAND1 the GeneralPortRestrictions (or In the case of the LABEL_RANGE1 the GeneralPortRestrictions (or
MatrixSpecificRestrictions) format is given by: MatrixSpecificRestrictions) format is given by:
0 1 2 3 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 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| MatrixID | RstType = 2 | MaxWaveBandWidth | | MatrixID | RstType = 2 | MaxLabelRange |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Label Set Field | | Label Set Field |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
In this case the accompanying MaxWaveBandWidth indicates the maximum In this case the accompanying MaxLabelRange indicates the maximum
width of the waveband in terms of the channels spacing given in the range of the labels. The corresponding label set is used to indicate
wavelength set. The corresponding wavelength set is used to indicate the overall label range. Specific center label information can be
the overall tuning range. Specific center frequency tuning obtained from dynamic label in use information. It is assumed that
information can be obtained from dynamic channel in use information. both center label and range tuning can be done without causing faults
It is assumed that both center frequency and bandwidth (Q) tuning can to existing signals.
be done without causing faults in existing signals.
6.4.4. SIMPLE_LABEL & CHANNEL_COUNT 5.4.4. SIMPLE_LABEL & CHANNEL_COUNT
In the case of the SIMPLE_LABEL & CHANNEL_COUNT the format is given In the case of the SIMPLE_LABEL & CHANNEL_COUNT the format is given
by: by:
0 1 2 3 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 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| MatrixInfo | RstType = 3 | MaxNumChannels | | MatrixInfo | RstType = 3 | MaxNumChannels |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Label Set Field | | Label Set Field |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
In this case the accompanying label set and MaxNumChannels indicate In this case the accompanying label set and MaxNumChannels indicate
labels permitted on the port and the maximum number of labels that labels permitted on the port and the maximum number of labels that
can be simultaneously used on the port. can be simultaneously used on the port.
7. Security Considerations 6. Security Considerations
This document defines protocol-independent encodings for WSON This document defines protocol-independent encodings for WSON
information and does not introduce any security issues. information and does not introduce any security issues.
However, other documents that make use of these encodings within However, other documents that make use of these encodings within
protocol extensions need to consider the issues and risks associated protocol extensions need to consider the issues and risks associated
with, inspection, interception, modification, or spoofing of any of with, inspection, interception, modification, or spoofing of any of
this information. It is expected that any such documents will this information. It is expected that any such documents will
describe the necessary security measures to provide adequate describe the necessary security measures to provide adequate
protection. protection.
8. IANA Considerations 7. IANA Considerations
TBD. Once our approach is finalized we may need identifiers for the TBD. Once our approach is finalized we may need identifiers for the
various TLVs and sub-TLVs. various TLVs and sub-TLVs.
9. Acknowledgments 8. Acknowledgments
This document was prepared using 2-Word-v2.0.template.dot. This document was prepared using 2-Word-v2.0.template.dot.
APPENDIX A: Encoding Examples APPENDIX A: Encoding Examples
Here we give examples of the general encoding extensions applied to Here we give examples of the general encoding extensions applied to
some simple WSON network elements and links. some simple WSON network elements and links.
A.1. Link Set Field A.1. Link Set Field
skipping to change at page 23, line 5 skipping to change at page 23, line 5
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Action=0 |0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0| Length = 8 |12 | Action=0 |0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0| Length = 8 |12
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Link Local Identifier = #1 |13 | Link Local Identifier = #1 |13
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Action=0 |0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0| Length = 8 |14 | Action=0 |0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0| Length = 8 |14
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Link Local Identifier = #2 |15 | Link Local Identifier = #2 |15
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
10. References 9. References
10.1. Normative References 9.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2863] McCloghrie, K. and F. Kastenholz, "The Interfaces Group [RFC2863] McCloghrie, K. and F. Kastenholz, "The Interfaces Group
MIB", RFC 2863, June 2000. MIB", RFC 2863, June 2000.
[RFC3471] Berger, L., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching [RFC3471] Berger, L., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
(GMPLS) Signaling Functional Description", RFC 3471, (GMPLS) Signaling Functional Description", RFC 3471,
January 2003. January 2003.
skipping to change at page 23, line 30 skipping to change at page 23, line 30
applications: DWDM frequency grid", June, 2002. applications: DWDM frequency grid", June, 2002.
[RFC4202] Kompella, K., Ed., and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "Routing Extensions [RFC4202] Kompella, K., Ed., and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "Routing Extensions
in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
(GMPLS)", RFC 4202, October 2005 (GMPLS)", RFC 4202, October 2005
[RFC4203] Kompella, K., Ed., and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "OSPF Extensions in [RFC4203] Kompella, K., Ed., and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "OSPF Extensions in
Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
(GMPLS)", RFC 4203, October 2005. (GMPLS)", RFC 4203, October 2005.
10.2. Informative References 9.2. Informative References
[G.694.1] ITU-T Recommendation G.694.1, Spectral grids for WDM [G.694.1] ITU-T Recommendation G.694.1, Spectral grids for WDM
applications: DWDM frequency grid, June 2002. applications: DWDM frequency grid, June 2002.
[G.694.2] ITU-T Recommendation G.694.2, Spectral grids for WDM [G.694.2] ITU-T Recommendation G.694.2, Spectral grids for WDM
applications: CWDM wavelength grid, December 2003. applications: CWDM wavelength grid, December 2003.
[Otani] T. Otani, H. Guo, K. Miyazaki, D. Caviglia, "Generalized [Otani] T. Otani, H. Guo, K. Miyazaki, D. Caviglia, "Generalized
Labels for G.694 Lambda-Switching Capable Label Switching Labels for G.694 Lambda-Switching Capable Label Switching
Routers", work in progress: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g-694- Routers", work in progress: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g-694-
skipping to change at page 25, line 5 skipping to change at page 25, line 5
[WSON-Encode] G. Bernstein, Y. Lee, D. Li, W. Imajuku, "Routing and [WSON-Encode] G. Bernstein, Y. Lee, D. Li, W. Imajuku, "Routing and
Wavelength Assignment Information Encoding for Wavelength Wavelength Assignment Information Encoding for Wavelength
Switched Optical Networks", work in progress: draft-ietf- Switched Optical Networks", work in progress: draft-ietf-
ccamp-rwa-wson-encode, Februsary, 2010. ccamp-rwa-wson-encode, Februsary, 2010.
[PCEP] Vasseur, JP., Ed. and JL. Le Roux, Ed., "Path Computation [PCEP] Vasseur, JP., Ed. and JL. Le Roux, Ed., "Path Computation
Element (PCE) communication Protocol (PCEP) - Version 1", Element (PCE) communication Protocol (PCEP) - Version 1",
RFC5440. RFC5440.
11. Contributors 10. Contributors
Diego Caviglia Diego Caviglia
Ericsson Ericsson
Via A. Negrone 1/A 16153 Via A. Negrone 1/A 16153
Genoa Italy Genoa Italy
Phone: +39 010 600 3736 Phone: +39 010 600 3736
Email: diego.caviglia@(marconi.com, ericsson.com) Email: diego.caviglia@(marconi.com, ericsson.com)
Anders Gavler Anders Gavler
 End of changes. 47 change blocks. 
119 lines changed or deleted 92 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.38. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/