draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-wdm-02.txt		draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-wdm-03.txt
	CCAMP Working Group A. Fredette, Editor		Network Working Group A. Fredette, Editor
	Internet Draft (Hatteras Networks)		Internet Draft (Hatteras Networks)
	Category: Proposed Standard		Category: Standards Track
	Expiration Date: September 2003 J. Lang, Editor		Expiration Date: June 2004 J. Lang, Editor
	(Rincon Networks)		(Rincon Networks)
	March 2003		December 2003
	Link Management Protocol (LMP) for Dense Wavelength Division		Link Management Protocol (LMP) for Dense Wavelength Division
	Multiplexing (DWDM) Optical Line Systems		Multiplexing (DWDM) Optical Line Systems
	draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-wdm-02.txt		draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-wdm-03.txt
	Status of this Memo		Status of this Memo
	This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with		This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
	all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.		all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.
	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 2, line 10		skipping to change at page 2, line 10
	document we propose extensions to LMP to allow it to be used between		document we propose extensions to LMP to allow it to be used between
	a peer node and an adjacent optical line system (OLS). These		a peer node and an adjacent optical line system (OLS). These
	extensions are intended to satisfy the "Optical Link Interface		extensions are intended to satisfy the "Optical Link Interface
	Requirements" described in a companion document.		Requirements" described in a companion document.
	[Editor's note: "Changes from previous version" notes can be removed		[Editor's note: "Changes from previous version" notes can be removed
	prior to publication as an RFC.]		prior to publication as an RFC.]
	Changes from previous version:		Changes from previous version:
	o Editorial changes resulting from AD review.		o Modified the IANA Considerations section as a result of IESG
			review.
	1. Introduction		1. Introduction
	Networks are being developed with routers, switches, optical cross-		Networks are being developed with routers, switches, optical cross-
	connects (OXCs), dense wavelength division multiplexing (DWDM)		connects (OXCs), dense wavelength division multiplexing (DWDM)
	optical line systems (OLSs), and add-drop multiplexors (ADMs) that		optical line systems (OLSs), and add-drop multiplexors (ADMs) that
	use a common control plane [e.g., Generalized MPLS (GMPLS)] to		use a common control plane [e.g., Generalized MPLS (GMPLS)] to
	dynamically provision resources and to provide network survivability		dynamically provision resources and to provide network survivability
	using protection and restoration techniques.		using protection and restoration techniques.
	skipping to change at page 11, line 44		skipping to change at page 11, line 44
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
	| Type | Length | (Reserved) |		| Type | Length | (Reserved) |
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
	| Administrative Group |		| Administrative Group |
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
	The Reserved field should be sent as zero and ignored on receipt.		The Reserved field should be sent as zero and ignored on receipt.
	Administrative Group: 32 bits		Administrative Group: 32 bits
	A 32 bit value as defined in [OSPF-TE].		A 32 bit value as defined in [RFC3630].
	2.4. Fault Management		2.4. Fault Management
	Fault management consists of three major functions:		Fault management consists of three major functions:
	1. Fault Detection		1. Fault Detection
	2. Fault Localization		2. Fault Localization
	3. Fault Notification		3. Fault Notification
	The fault detection mechanisms are the responsibility of the		The fault detection mechanisms are the responsibility of the
	skipping to change at page 13, line 49		skipping to change at page 13, line 49
	this standard. Please address the information to the IETF Executive		this standard. Please address the information to the IETF Executive
	Director.		Director.
	4. References		4. References
	4.1. Normative References		4.1. Normative References
	[GMPLS-RTG] Kompella, K., Rekhter, Y. et al, "Routing Extensions in		[GMPLS-RTG] Kompella, K., Rekhter, Y. et al, "Routing Extensions in
	Support of Generalized MPLS," (work in progress).		Support of Generalized MPLS," (work in progress).
	[LMP] Lang, J. P., ed., "The Link Management Protocol (LMP),"		[LMP] Lang, J. P., Editor, "The Link Management Protocol
	(work in progress).		(LMP)," (work in progress).
	[LMP-SDH] Lang, J. P., Papadimitriou, D., "SONET/SDH Encoding for		[LMP-SDH] Lang, J. P., Papadimitriou, D., "SONET/SDH Encoding for
	Link Management Protocol (LMP) Test messages," (work in		Link Management Protocol (LMP) Test messages," (work in
	progress).		progress).
	[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.
	[RFC3471] Ashwood-Smith, P., Banerjee, A., et al, "Generalized		[RFC3471] Berger, L., Editor, "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label
	MPLS - Signaling Functional Description," RFC 3471,		Switching (GMPLS) - Signaling Functional Description,"
	January 2003.		RFC 3471, January 2003.
	[OSPF-TE] Katz, D, Yeung, D., and Kompella, K., "Traffic		[RFC3630] Katz, D., Yeung, D., and Kompella, K., "Traffic
	Engineering Extensions to OSPF Version 2," (work in		Engineering (TE) Extensions to OSPF Version 2," RFC
	progress).		3630, September 2003.
	4.2. Informative References		4.2. Informative References
	[OLI] Fredette, A., Editor, "Optical Link Interface		[OLI] Fredette, A., Editor, "Optical Link Interface
	Requirements," (work in progress).		Requirements," (work in progress).
	5. Security Considerations		5. Security Considerations
	LMP message security uses IPsec as described in [LMP]. This document		LMP message security uses IPsec as described in [LMP]. This document
	only defines new LMP objects that are carried in existing LMP		only defines new LMP objects that are carried in existing LMP
	messages. As such, this document introduces no other new security		messages. As such, this document introduces no other new security
	considerations not covered in [LMP].		considerations not covered in [LMP].
	6. IANA Considerations		6. IANA Considerations
	LMP defines the following name spaces that require management:		LMP [LMP] defines the following name spaces and how IANA can make
			assignments in those namespaces:
	- LMP Message Type.		- LMP Message Type.
	- LMP Object Class.		- LMP Object Class.
	- LMP Object Class type (C-Type) unique within the Object Class.		- LMP Object Class type (C-Type) unique within the Object Class.
	- LMP Sub-object Class type (Type) unique within the Object Class.		- LMP Sub-object Class type (Type) unique within the Object Class.
	This memo introduces the following name spaces which need		This memo introduces the following new assignments:
	assignment:
	o CONFIG		LMP Object Class Types:
			o under CONFIG class name (as defined in [LMP])
	- LMP-WDM_CONFIG (suggested C-Type = 2)		- LMP-WDM_CONFIG (suggested C-Type = 2)
	o CHANNEL_STATUS		o under CHANNEL_STATUS class name (as defined in [LMP])
	- LINK_GROUP (suggested C-Type = 4)		- LINK_GROUP (suggested C-Type = 4)
	LMP sub-object Class type (C-Type) should be assigned from the range		LMP Sub-Object Class names:
	0-127.
	o DATA_LINK		o under DATA_LINK Class name (as defined in [LMP])
	- Link_GroupId (suggested sub-object Type = 3)		- Link_GroupId (suggested sub-object Type = 3)
	- SRLG (suggested sub-object Type = 4)		- SRLG (suggested sub-object Type = 4)
	- BER_Estimate (suggested sub-object Type = 5)		- BER_Estimate (suggested sub-object Type = 5)
	- Optical_Protection (suggested sub-object Type = 6)		- Optical_Protection (suggested sub-object Type = 6)
	- Total_Span_Length (suggested sub-object Type = 7)		- Total_Span_Length (suggested sub-object Type = 7)
	- Administrative_Group (suggested sub-object Type = 8)		- Administrative_Group (suggested sub-object Type = 8)
	7. Contributors		7. Contributors
	Osama S. Aboul-Magd, Stuart Brorson, Sudheer Dharanikota, John		Osama S. Aboul-Magd, Stuart Brorson, Sudheer Dharanikota, John
	skipping to change at page 15, line 22		skipping to change at page 15, line 22
	Xue, Lucy Yong, John Yu.		Xue, Lucy Yong, John Yu.
	8. Contact Address		8. Contact Address
	Andre Fredette		Andre Fredette
	Hatteras Networks		Hatteras Networks
	P.O. Box 110025		P.O. Box 110025
	Research Triangle Park		Research Triangle Park
	NC 27709-0025, USA		NC 27709-0025, USA
	E-mail: Afredette@HatterasNetworks.com		EMail: Afredette@HatterasNetworks.com
	Jonathan P. Lang		Jonathan P. Lang
	Rincon Networks		Rincon Networks
	110 El Paseo		829 De La Vina, Suite 220
	Santa Barbara, CA 93101, USA		Santa Barbara, CA 93101, USA
	E-mail: jplang@ieee.org		EMail: jplang@ieee.org
	9. Full Copyright Statement		9. Full Copyright Statement
	Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). All Rights Reserved.		Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). All Rights Reserved.
	This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to		This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
	others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it		others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
	or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published		or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
	and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any		and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
	kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph		kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph
End of changes.
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.23, available from http://www.levkowetz.com/ietf/tools/rfcdiff/