* WGs marked with an * asterisk has had at least one new draft made available during the last 5 days

Ccamp Status Pages

Common Control and Measurement Plane (Active WG)
Rtg Area: Alvaro Retana, Alia Atlas, Deborah Brungard | 2001-Jan-31 —  
Chairs
 
 


IETF-99 ccamp minutes

Session 2017-07-20 1550-1750: Karlin III - Audio stream - ccamp chatroom

Minutes

minutes-99-ccamp-00 minute



          CCAMP Session IETF 99
          
          Thursday, July 20, 2017(CEST)
          
          15:50-17:50 – Afternoon Session II
          
          Presentation        Start Time
          Duration
          Information
          
          0                   15:50           10
          
          Title: Administrivia - WG Status - Reporting on WG drafts not
          being presented
          
          Draft:
          
          Presenter: Chairs
          
          1     
          16:00         
          10
          
          Title: A framework for Management and Control of DWDM optical
          interface parameters
          
          Draft:https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-dwdm-if-mng-ctrl-fwk-06
          
          
          Presenter: Ruediger Kunze
          
          Jan Kundrat: Editorial change, the text refers to a “yellow”
          triangle. Please remove it. Daniele Ceccarelli: Thanks for intermediate
          versions. Readability OK now.
          
          [Poll] Does anyone object moving the draft to WG LC? No one.
          
          Fatai Zhang: please check if you use RFC language, if not please
          remove section 1.1
          
          2                    16:10             0 
          
          Title: A Yang Data Model for WSON Optical Networks and tunnels
          
          Draft: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-yang-07
          
          Draft: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-lee-ccamp-wson-tunnel-model-01
          
          Presenter: Young Lee
          
          *draft presented in the joint YANG session (see TEAS session II)
          
          3                   16:10
               10
          
          Title:        Info model and
          information encoding for WSON with impairments validation
          
          Draft: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-iv-info-05
          
          Draft:
          https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-martinelli-ccamp-wson-iv-encode-08
          
          Presenter: Giovanni Martinelli
          
          (regarding the first draft)
          
          Dieter Beller: What is the added value of defining the optical
          parameters without having a model for optical feasibility
          calculation? Still
          unresolved issue in my opinion.
          
          Giovanni M.: The parameters have been discussed with the ITU-T
          several times. There are refences to ITU-T documents in the draft.
          
          Dieter B.: The problem is not lack of reference but lack of model
          to guarantee optical feasibility.
          
          Gabriele Galimberti: The document allows anyone to use the parameters
          (e.g. by a controller) and defines how to exchange them. The document
          does not
          define them nor how to use them.
          
          Young Lee: I agree with Gabriele, this draft adds additional
          attributes for path computation.
          
          Giovanni M.: We have also split the document and thrown away those
          not defined in ITU.
          
          Julien Meuric: Everyone acks it is not the full solution to the
          big problem, but it remains useful and required.
          
          Dieter B.: Is the set of optical impairments parameters
          complete?
          
          Giovanni M.: It is complete according to the scope of the
          document. See section 3 of the document.
          
          (regarding the second draft):
          
          Authors believe it is ready for WG adpoption (still open points
          and encoding...)
          
          Sergio Belotti: (regarding first draft). There is an uncompleted
          section (Section 5.4).
          
          Giovanni: It is an issue, without many content, and we will
          continue working on it.
          
          4
          16:20
          10
          
          Title:        A framework and YANG
          model for Management and Control of microwave and millimeter wave
          interface
          parameters
          
          Draft:
          https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-microwave-framework-01
          
          Draft:        https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-mw-yang-01
          
          Presenter: Jonas Ahlberg
          
          Daniele C.: Congratulations to you and the team for the award at
          the hackathon. I have a comment from Lou to try to make another effort
          about
          what can be generalized. The microwave technology has a variable bit-rate
          but
          there are also other technologies like e.g. elastic optics. We can add
          some
          notes in the framework indicating that the considerations are applicable
          also to
          other technologies. Little bit more changes are expected on the YANG
          model.
          
          Two options for the model: one is to have a new document with the generic
          part and leave the technology-specific parts here or to keep the generic
          and
          mw-specific parts in the current document but clearly separated.
          
          Amy Y.: Personally, prefer the second option.
          
          Oscar G.: Is there any reference to ETSI specification in the YANG
          model parameters?
          
          Jonas A.: We have referred to a set of documents (each of which
          often referring each other), but not indicated in detail where each
          parameter comes
          from.
          
          Giovanni M.: Something that could be generalized could be the
          protection part (manual, force switch) and priority support.
          
          Jonas A.: Will need to consider different protection
          mechanisms.
          
          6
          16:30
          15
          
          Title:        Transport
          Northbound Interface Use Cases and Gap Analysis UC1
          
          Draft:
          https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-tnbidt-ccamp-transport-nbi-use-cases-02
          
          Draft:
          https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-tnbidt-ccamp-transport-nbi-analysis-uc1-00
          
          
          Presenter: Italo Busi
          
          Jan Kundrat: Are you considering also OpenROADM(No)
          
          Daniele C.: We could help you with liaisons and communications
          once the draft are WG documents. How did you provide feedbacks to TEAS?
          
          Italo B: contributions to the design team call.
          
          Fatai Z.: Some coordination with Igor's draft is needed to avoid
          conflicts on the NBI.
          
          Italo: will do
          
          Sergio: Regarding OpenROADM, that is a device model while our
          scope is a network model.
          
          Daniele C.:[poll] How many have read the use cases draft? almost
          everyone.
          
          How many think the WG should adopt this work? almost
          everyone.
          
          7
          16:45
          10
          
          Title:        Flexigrid and flexigrid
          media channel YANG models
          
          Draft:
          https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-vergara-ccamp-flexigrid-yang-05
          
          Draft:
          https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-vergara-ccamp-flexigrid-media-channel-yang-00
          
          
          Presenter:       Oscar Gonzalez de
          Dios
          
          Jan K.: Same values of M and N could be used to identify
          incompatible channels. Was it ever considered to use Ghz or Thz to
          identify the
          center of the channel of the channel width?
          
          Gabriele G.: We are using M and N first because this is in line
          with ITU-T and second because using THz or lambda we may end up in
          rounding
          issues and the frequency can be misinterpreted (5 digits after the comma
          are
          not enough). Maybe you are thinking about the OpenROADM model which I
          disagree
          with because it has this issue.
          
          Dieter B: M and N parameters are well defined in ITU-T
          recommendation G694.1, which should apply here. G694.1 should be added as
          normative reference.
          
          Gabriele G.: Moreover, N is still valid in case you add future
          granularities (e.g. 3.125Ghz) or apply it to fixed grid (e.g. 50Ghz).
          
          Yuji T.: Can you please clarify terminology in the draft when
          speaking about Media Channel and Network Media Channel?
          
          Oscar G.: Terminology is discussed in the framework document(RFC7698)
          and in ITU.
          
          Yuji T.: This should be aligned with ITU-T recommendation G.872, and
          with a new work in ITU-T called G.media.
          
          Oscar G.: In IETF we define how we abstact those data plane
          constructs.
          
          Young L.: Good base for WG adoption. The names need to be aligned
          with TE-Tunnel mode.
          
          Haomian Z.: Terminology alignment occurred between flex grid and
          RFC7698(framework). We need to align also with other IETF models.
          
          Dieter B.: Please reconsider the definition of connectivity matrix
          in the TEAS TE Topology. Extensions should be aligned with the
          connectivity
          matrix definition in the base model. In addition, it should be read-only
          for
          WDM networks.
          
          Young L.: Late changes we need to align with. We also still need
          application codes. Authors will align offline with TE Topology authors.
          
          
          8
          16:55
          10
          
          Title: Signaling extensions for Media Channel sub-carriers
          configuration in SSON in LSC Optical Line Systems.
          
          Draft:
          https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ggalimber-ccamp-flexigrid-carrier-label-01
          
          
          Presenter:        Gabriele
          Galimberti
          
          Note: Given the interesting discussion raised by the presentation
          Gabriele decided to use the time allocated to slots 9 and 10 to continue
          the
          discussion related to slot 8.
          
          Qilei Wang: Could you explain the relationship
          between sub-carrier and OTSi? In my understanding, one OTSi can contain
          two
          sub-carriers.
          
          Gabriele Galimberti: ITU-T defines that one OTSi
          can have two or more sub-carriers. In the example, the payload is shared
          between two OTSi. If one OTSi is lost, all the payload is lost. It is
          a sort of
          inverse multiplexing, but is detailed implementation.
          
          Dieter Beller: Why the change from experimental to informational?
          Also, I wonder whether CCAMP is the right place to standardize
          proprietary
          solution.
          
          Gabriele Galimberti: It is about experimental,
          but I think this can also inform what the solution could solve the
          problem of
          multi-carrier transponder.
          
          Dieter Beller: A product from which vendor?
          
          Gabriele: My vendor.
          
          Daniele Ceccarelli: This is a perfect example for experimental. It
          is something not standard, but with real code.
          
          Gabriele Galimberti: No problem to move back to
          experimental
          
          Julien Meuric: As operator, I would be happy to have other
          proprietary proposals joining this initiative, because it could be a
          way to
          turn into a standard track document. Considering I am actually deploying
          this
          multi-vendor alien wavelength, this is required to stop doing manual or
          multiple-step operations.  I support the work, we would like to see
          multiple
          vendors work on this topic.
          
          Daniele Ceccarelli: How would you like to see this progress?
          Experimental?
          
          Haomian Zheng: Explicit data plane standard to
          support multi vendor should be required, however we don't have it yet. If
          every
          vendor bring their own implementation, it still cannot support operator's
          requirements.
          
          Gabriele Galimberti: We are open to hear from other vendors’
          solution on SSON.
          
          Yuji Tochio: This draft defines modulation ID inside, it needs to
          have clear references for the modulation ID.
          
          Gabriele Galimberti: I list a lot of modulation formats in the
          draft, probably it is not exhaustive. Probably it is not the best to
          represent
          the parameters. We have a number for each modulation format. I am open,
          no
          problem to change the order.
          
          Italo Busi: Q6/15 in ITU-T is working on a
          standard data plane, it is better to wait for data plane standard before
          having
          control plane standard.
          
          Gabriele Galimberti: The market is not waiting.
          
          Sergio Belotti: You said before no more
          experimental but this is proto. Question is that whether IETF has to
          standardize company proto even it is supported by operators.
          
          Daniele Ceccarelli: An
          experimental draft doesn’t mean standardization. You
          cannot be informational because you are defining TLVs. Let’s progress
          with the
          assumption that this document goes back to experimental status.
          
          Giovanni Martinelli: For multi-vendor issue,
          ITU-T does not define interoperable standard. Something need to be moved
          even though
          the data plane standard is not available now. For modulation formats,
          we can
          have a table to refer. Changing encoding give you changing modulation
          format.
          
          Julien Meuric: An informative or experimental draft is better than
          nothing.
          
          9
          17:05
          10
          
          Title:        Extension to LMP
          for DWDM Optical Line Systems to manage the application code of optical
          interface parameters in DWDM application
          
          Draft:
          https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dharinigert-ccamp-dwdm-if-lmp-04
          
          Draft:
          https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ggalimbe-ccamp-flex-if-lmp-02
          
          Presenter:        Gabriele
          Galimberti
          
          (skipped to have more time for previous discussion)
          
          10
          17:15
          10
          
          Title:        A YANG model to
          manage the optical interface parameters for an external transponder in
          a WDM
          network and optical paramenter in a WDM network
          
          Draft:
          https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dharini-ccamp-dwdm-if-param-yang-02
          
          Draft:        https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-galimbe-ccamp-iv-yang-03
          
          Presenter:        Gert Grammel
          
          (skipped to have more time for previous discussion)
          
          11
          17:25
          10
          
          Title:        GMPLS Routing and
          Signaling Framework for B100G
          
          Draft:
          https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-merge-ccamp-otn-b100g-fwk-01
          
          Presenter:        Qilei Wang
          
          Yuji Tochio: -01 has three flexE
          use cases, there seems to be new for 4.5, please handle it carefully.
          
          Qilei: We will check.
          
          12
          17:35
          15
          Title:        GMPLS Routing and Signaling
          Framework for Flexible Ethernet (FlexE)
          
          Draft:        https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-izh-ccamp-flexe-fwk-03
          
          Presenter:        Loa Andersson
          
          Deborah A Brungard: in the diagram, what's switching
          in the middle box?
          
          Loa Andersson: FlexE is not a switching
          technology.
          
          Deborah A Brungard: as individual,
          FlexE calendar slot is not switching, but terminiated. LSP as an example,
          FlexE
          , show the architeture, FlexE is purly a link, terminated inside. FlexE
          then
          just a encoding of the link. It's nothing to be switched
          
          Andrew Malis: two different approaches, GMPLS approach, label is
          not exist on the data packet; MPLS apporach, labels on the data
          packet
          
          Yuji Tochio: Is the FlexE sub link differnt from FlexE clinet (in
          OIF IA)?
          
          Loa Andersson: FlexE sub-link is a link with one Ethernet
          interface at each end and FlexE client between them.
          
          Mach Chen: We do not support FlexE switching. FlexE terminates at
          each hop. The FlexE frame will be recovered to Ethernet/MPLS packet, then
          transmitted to the next hop. It is just like what is defined in the OIF
          FlexE
          IA.
          
          Loa Andersson: We are setting up an MPLS LSP.configure the
          undelying and sub link by GMPLS signaling and routing.
          
          Deborah A Brungard: it's not controllable, it's atuomatic. talk to
          the ITU-T people.
          
          13
          17:50
          0
          
          Title: ISIS Extensions for Flexible Ethernet (if time
          permits)
          
          Draft:
          https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zcdc-isis-flexe-extention-01
          
          Presenter:        Mach Chen
          
          Daniele Ceccarelli: once we have understood what to switch, I
          would say this is a CCAMP draft, not ISIS draft
          
          Julien Meuric: We have done IGP extension in CCAMP. But I think
          this draft doesn't match.
          
          Daniele Ceccarelli: Need to make it clear what you want to
          advertise. The draft is talking about changing the switching capability
          descriptor.
          
          Mach: OK
          
          



Generated from PyHt script /wg/ccamp/minutes.pyht Latest update: 24 Oct 2012 16:51 GMT -