--- 1/draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-03.txt 2009-09-09 18:12:12.000000000 +0200 +++ 2/draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-04.txt 2009-09-09 18:12:12.000000000 +0200 @@ -1,25 +1,25 @@ Network Working Group Y. Lee Internet Draft Huawei Intended status: Informational G. Bernstein -Expires: January 2010 Grotto Networking +Expires: March 2010 Grotto Networking D. Li Huawei W. Imajuku NTT - July 10, 2009 + September 9, 2009 Routing and Wavelength Assignment Information Model for Wavelength Switched Optical Networks - draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-03.txt + draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-04.txt Status of this Memo This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and 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. @@ -28,21 +28,21 @@ 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 November 10, 2009. + This Internet-Draft will expire on March 9, 2009. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents in effect on the date of publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info). Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights @@ -57,48 +57,48 @@ WSONs, particularly in cases where there are no or a limited number of wavelength converters available. This model does not include optical impairments. Table of Contents 1. Introduction...................................................3 1.1. Revision History..........................................3 1.1.1. Changes from 01......................................3 1.1.2. Changes from 02......................................3 + 1.1.3. Changes from 03......................................4 2. Terminology....................................................4 - 3. Routing and Wavelength Assignment Information Model............4 + 3. Routing and Wavelength Assignment Information Model............5 3.1. Dynamic and Relatively Static Information.................5 3.2. Node Information..........................................5 3.2.1. Connectivity Matrix..................................6 - 3.2.2. Shared Risk Node Group...............................6 + 3.2.2. Shared Risk Node Group...............................7 3.2.3. Wavelength Converter Pool............................7 3.2.4. OEO Wavelength Converter Info.......................10 3.3. Link Information.........................................10 - 3.3.1. Link ID.............................................11 - 3.3.2. Administrative Group................................11 - 3.3.3. Interface Switching Capability Descriptor...........11 - 3.3.4. Link Protection Type (for this link)................11 - 3.3.5. Shared Risk Link Group Information..................11 - 3.3.6. Traffic Engineering Metric..........................12 - 3.3.7. Port Wavelength (label) Restrictions................12 + 3.3.1. Administrative Group................................10 + 3.3.2. Interface Switching Capability Descriptor...........11 + 3.3.3. Link Protection Type (for this link)................11 + 3.3.4. Shared Risk Link Group Information..................11 + 3.3.5. Traffic Engineering Metric..........................11 + 3.3.6. Port Wavelength (label) Restrictions................11 3.4. Dynamic Link Information.................................13 - 3.5. Dynamic Node Information.................................14 + 3.5. Dynamic Node Information.................................13 4. Security Considerations.......................................14 - 5. IANA Considerations...........................................15 - 6. Acknowledgments...............................................15 - 7. References....................................................16 - 7.1. Normative References.....................................16 - 7.2. Informative References...................................16 - 8. Contributors..................................................17 - Author's Addresses...............................................18 - Intellectual Property Statement..................................18 - Disclaimer of Validity...........................................19 + 5. IANA Considerations...........................................14 + 6. Acknowledgments...............................................14 + 7. References....................................................15 + 7.1. Normative References.....................................15 + 7.2. Informative References...................................15 + 8. Contributors..................................................16 + Author's Addresses...............................................17 + Intellectual Property Statement..................................17 + Disclaimer of Validity...........................................18 1. Introduction The purpose of the following information model for WSONs is to facilitate constrained lightpath computation and as such is not a general purpose network management information model. In particular this model has particular value in the cases where there are no or a limited number of wavelength converters available in the WSON. This constraint is frequently referred to as the "wavelength continuity" constraint, and the corresponding constrained lightpath computation @@ -140,20 +140,27 @@ specified how general label restrictions could be taken into account with this model. Removed the Shared Risk Node Group parameter from the node info, but left explanation of how the same functionality can be achieved with existing GMPLS SRLG constructs. Removed Maximum bandwidth per channel parameter from link information. + 1.1.3. Changes from 03 + + Removed signal related text from section 3.2.4 as signal related + information is deferred to a new signal compatibility draft. + + Removed encoding specific text from Section 3.3.1 of version 03. + 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 @@ -255,21 +264,21 @@ transmission and path computation [Encode]. Note that the connectivity matrix concept can be useful in any context where asymmetric switches are utilized. ConnectivityMatrix(i, j) ::= Where is a unique identifier for the matrix. The MatrixID of 0 - (zero) is reserved (see section 3.3.7. + (zero) is reserved (see section 3.3.6. can be either 0 or 1 depending upon whether the connectivity is either fixed or potentially switched. represents the fixed or switched connectivity in that Matrix(i, j) = 0 or 1 depending on whether ingress port i can connect to egress port j for one or more wavelengths. 3.2.2. Shared Risk Node Group @@ -381,113 +390,83 @@ Note that except for all the other components of are relatively static. In addition is a relatively small structure compared potentially to the others and hence in a future revision of this document maybe moved to a new section on dynamic node information. 3.2.4. OEO Wavelength Converter Info An OEO based wavelength converter can be characterized by an input - wavelength set and an output wavelength set. In addition any - constraints on the signal formats and rates accommodated by the - converter must be described. Such a wavelength converter can be - modeled by: - - ::= [] - [] - - Where the RegeneratorType is used to model an OEO regenerator. - Regenerators are usually classified into three types [G.sup39]. Level - 1 provides signal amplification, level 2 amplification and pulse - shaping, and level 3 amplification, pulse shaping and timing - regeneration. Level 2 regenerators can have a restricted bit rate - range, while level 3 regenerators can also be specialized to a - particular signal type. - - BitRateRange: indicates the range of bit rates that can be - accommodated by the wavelength converter. + wavelength set and an output wavelength set. Such a wavelength + converter can be modeled by: - AcceptableSignals: is a list of signals that the wavelength converter - can handle. This could be fairly general for Level 1 and Level 2 - regenerators, e.g., characterized by general signal properties such - as modulation type and related parameters, or fairly specific signal - types for Level 3 based regenerators. + ::= [] + [] 3.3. Link Information MPLS-TE routing protocol extensions for OSPF and IS-IS [RFC3630], [RFC5305] along with GMPLS routing protocol extensions for OSPF and IS-IS [RFC4203, RFC5307] provide the bulk of the relatively static link information needed by the RWA process. WSON networks bring in additional link related constraints. These stem from WDM line system characterization, laser transmitter tuning restrictions, and switching subsystem port wavelength constraints, e.g., colored ROADM drop ports. In the following summarize both information from existing route protocols and new information that maybe needed by the RWA process. ::= [] [] [] []... [] [] - 3.3.1. Link ID - - ::= - - - Here we can generally identify a link via a combination of local and - remote node identifiers along with the corresponding local and remote - link identifiers per [RFC4202, RFC4203, RFC5307]. Note that reference - [RFC3630] provides other ways to identify local and remote link ends - in the case of numbered links. - - 3.3.2. Administrative Group + 3.3.1. Administrative Group AdministrativeGroup: Defined in [RFC3630]. Each set bit corresponds to one administrative group assigned to the interface. A link may belong to multiple groups. This is a configured quantity and can be used to influence routing decisions. - 3.3.3. Interface Switching Capability Descriptor + 3.3.2. Interface Switching Capability Descriptor InterfaceSwCapDesc: Defined in [RFC4202], lets us know the different switching capabilities on this GMPLS interface. In both [RFC4203] and [RFC5307] this information gets combined with the maximum LSP bandwidth that can be used on this link at eight different priority levels. - 3.3.4. Link Protection Type (for this link) + 3.3.3. Link Protection Type (for this link) Protection: Defined in [RFC4202] and implemented in [RFC4203, RFC5307]. Used to indicate what protection, if any, is guarding this link. - 3.3.5. Shared Risk Link Group Information + 3.3.4. Shared Risk Link Group Information SRLG: Defined in [RFC4202] and implemented in [RFC4203, RFC5307]. This allows for the grouping of links into shared risk groups, i.e., those links that are likely, for some reason, to fail at the same time. - 3.3.6. Traffic Engineering Metric + 3.3.5. Traffic Engineering Metric TrafficEngineeringMetric: Defined in [RFC3630]. This allows for the definition of one additional link metric value for traffic engineering separate from the IP link state routing protocols link metric. Note that multiple "link metric values" could find use in optical networks, however it would be more useful to the RWA process to assign these specific meanings such as link mile metric, or probability of failure metric, etc... - 3.3.7. Port Wavelength (label) Restrictions + 3.3.6. Port Wavelength (label) Restrictions Port wavelength (label) restrictions (PortWavelengthRestriction) model the wavelength (label) restrictions that the link and various optical devices such as OXCs, ROADMs, and waveband multiplexers may impose on a port. These restrictions tell us what wavelength may or may not be used on a link and are relatively static. This plays an important role in fully characterizing a WSON switching device [Switch]. Port wavelength restrictions are specified relative to the port in general or to a specific connectivity matrix (section 3.2.1. Reference [Switch] gives an example where both switch and fixed @@ -641,21 +618,21 @@ Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)", RFC 4203, October 2005. [RFC5305] Li, T. and H. Smit, "IS-IS Extensions for Traffic Engineering", RFC 5305, October 2008. [RFC5307] Kompella, K., Ed., and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "IS-IS Extensions in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)", RFC 5307, October 2008. - [WSON-Frame] G. Bernstein, Y. Lee, W. Imajuku, "Framework for GMPLS + [WSON-Frame] Y. Lee, G. Bernstein, W. Imajuku, "Framework for GMPLS and PCE Control of Wavelength Switched Optical Networks", work in progress: draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-wson-framework. 7.2. Informative References [Shared] G. Bernstein, Y. Lee, "Shared Backup Mesh Protection in PCE- based WSON Networks", iPOP 2008, http://www.grotto- networking.com/wson/iPOP2008_WSON-shared-mesh-poster.pdf . [Switch] G. Bernstein, Y. Lee, A. Gavler, J. Martensson, " Modeling