Internet DRAFT - draft-rao-ccamp-mlnmrn-otn-ospfte-ext
draft-rao-ccamp-mlnmrn-otn-ospfte-ext
INTERNET-DRAFT Khuzema Pithewan
Intended Status: Standard Track Rajan Rao
Infinera
Expires: April 20, 2014 October 17, 2013
OSPF-TE extensions for MLNMRN based on OTN
draft-rao-ccamp-mlnmrn-otn-ospfte-ext-03.txt
Abstract
This document specifies OSPF extensions for multi-layer/multi-region
where one of the regions is multi-layer e.g. OTN, SONET/SDH.
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.
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/1id-abstracts.html
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
Copyright and License Notice
Copyright (c) 2013 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
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
Khuzema Pithewan Expires April 20, 2014 [Page 1]
INTERNET DRAFTdraft-rao-ccamp-mlnmrn-otn-ospfte-ext-03.txt Oct 17, 2013
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2 Layer Identification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3 OTN Layer ID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4 SONET/SDH Layer Identification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5 Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6 Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6.1. Ethernet and OTN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6.2. OTN and FlexGrid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6.3. OTN and SONET/SDH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6.4. OTN and OTN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7 IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
8 Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
9 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
10. Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Khuzema Pithewan Expires April 20, 2014 [Page 2]
INTERNET DRAFTdraft-rao-ccamp-mlnmrn-otn-ospfte-ext-03.txt Oct 17, 2013
1 Introduction
In order to do end-to-end path computation, where a path may involve
more than one region and part of single routing domain, TE Links
connecting the two regions need to have bandwidth capacity advertised
for the switch that connects the two regions. This document specifies
the OSPF extensions that are required if any of the region is a
multi-layer network. The specification is based on the requirement as
specified in RFC 5212. As per the said RFC, ISCD characterizes the
information associated to one or more network layers. Same RFC also
says that the information about the adjustment capabilities of the
nodes in the network allow the path computation process to select an
end-to-end multi-layer or multi- region path that includes links with
different switching capabilities joined by LSRs that can adapt (i.e.,
adjust) the signal between the links. By inference, information about
the adjustment capabilities should be able to identify a layer in
ISCD, if ISCD specifies more than one layer.
RFC6001 specifies how to advertise adjustment capabilities between
two switching regions. IACD definition has provision to extend it for
a specific technology through Adjustment Capability Specific
information (ACSI) field, if required. ACSI field can be used to
identify a layer in the multi-layer ISCD.
While OTN multi-layer technology is a primary driver for this
extension, the extensions in this document does cover specifications
for multi-layer technologies in general. To make sure the extensions
are extensible to other multi-layer technologies as well, this
document covers SDH/SONET as well.
2 Layer Identification
Multi-region path computation requires to identify a layer in the
multi-layer region. This mandates layer identification along with
identification of technology in the region. The technology
identification is done via Switching capability and Encoding type.
IACD needs to be extended to be able to carry layer identification.
the layer Identification is OPTIONAL and used only when interface
supports layer multiplexing and hence creating a need to identify a
layer. A new Layer ID Sub-TLV has been defined to carry layer
identification.
Khuzema Pithewan Expires April 20, 2014 [Page 3]
INTERNET DRAFTdraft-rao-ccamp-mlnmrn-otn-ospfte-ext-03.txt Oct 17, 2013
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type |R| Reserved | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... |
| Variable size field to identify layer |
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Type : Type field is used to identify a particular structure of
variable size field, which is specific to the particular Switching
Capability and Encoding type combination
R : This bit is used to make sense whether the Layer ID is for Lower
region or upper region. 1 means upper region and 0 means lower.
IACD can have at-most 2 Layer ID TLVs, if both the regions are multi-
layer.
Next two sections specifies Layer ID for two multi-layer technologies
namely, OTN and SONET/SDH
3 OTN Layer ID
RFC6001 defines IACD sub-TLV as follows. Please refer to the RFC for
definition of individual fields of the sub-TLV.
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Lower SC | Lower Encoding| Upper SC | Upper Encoding|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 0 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 2 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 3 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 5 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 6 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 7 |
Khuzema Pithewan Expires April 20, 2014 [Page 4]
INTERNET DRAFTdraft-rao-ccamp-mlnmrn-otn-ospfte-ext-03.txt Oct 17, 2013
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Adjustment Capability-specific information |
| (variable) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
[GMPLS-OTN-OSPF] defines attributes that identifies a layer in multi-
layer OTN ISCD. These attributes are part of Bandwidth sub-TLV in
Switch capability specific information of ISCD. These attributes are
reproduced here for completeness sake.
* Signal Type: Layer for which bandwidth is being advertised.
* Hierarchy : also called as multiplexing branch that specifies all
the layers between server layer and signal type.
* TSG : Time Slot Granularity
Adjustment Capability-specific information abbreviated as ACSI
henceforth for OTN G.709v3 carries LayerID Sub-TLV which is defined
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type = 1 |R| Reserved | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Signal type | Num of stages |TSG | Res | Stage#1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Stage#2 | ... | Stage#N | Padding |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
This LayerID sub-TLV is applicable only when one of the regions is
OTN, which means either lower or upper SC and Encoding type MUST have
Switch Cap as OTN-TDM and encoding type as G.709 ODUk.
R bit is used to make sense whether the Layer ID is for Lower region
or upper region. 1 means upper region and 0 means lower.
The 8 priorities of the BW as defined in main IACD structure, is
adjustment capability between the two regions where one of the region
is identifies by LayerID sub-TLV.
Absence of this sub-TLV for OTN means that the OTN ISCD doesn't
support multiplexing.
Khuzema Pithewan Expires April 20, 2014 [Page 5]
INTERNET DRAFTdraft-rao-ccamp-mlnmrn-otn-ospfte-ext-03.txt Oct 17, 2013
4 SONET/SDH Layer Identification
G.707 defines the structure of SDH multiplexing hierarchy and RFC
4606 defines generalized label structure needed to fully specify
SONET/SDH multiplexing hierarchy. This Label structure also referred
as SUKLM structure identifies all the layers of the multiplexing
hierarchy along with time slots. For the purpose of this draft, only
layer identification is needed, hence each layer can be identified by
a bit. Bit value 1 signifies presence of the layer and 0, its
absence. 5 Bits, each representing one layer is sufficient to fully
identify the SONET/SDH multiplexing hierarchy.
Layer ID sub TLV for SONET/SDH is defined 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type = 2 |R| Reserved | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|S|U|K|L|M| Padding |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
SUKLM bits signifies the presence of SONET/SDH layers and these bits
together fully specifies the multiplexing hierarchy. Refer to Section
3 of RFC 4606 for full specification of SUKLM bits.
Absence of sub-TLV means that the SONET/SDH ISCD doesn't support
multiplexing and needs only transparent mapping to other Interface.
5 Procedure
A node advertising IACD for the bandwidth between regions where one
or both of them are hierarchical i.e. OTN or SONET/SDH, MUST include
the Layer ID sub-TLV as part of ACSI as defined above.
For multi-region path computation, the path computing node MUST look
at the LayerID sub-TLV (in ACSI part of IACD) if lower/upper {SC,Enc]
is {OTN-TDM,G.709ODUk} or {TDM,SONET/SDH} to identify the layer for
correct layer for BW check.
6 Examples
This section exemplifies TLV values for various technology region
combinations, where one of the region is OTN
Khuzema Pithewan Expires April 20, 2014 [Page 6]
INTERNET DRAFTdraft-rao-ccamp-mlnmrn-otn-ospfte-ext-03.txt Oct 17, 2013
6.1. Ethernet and OTN When upper region is Ethernet and lower region
is OTN
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| PSC-1 | Ethernet | OTN-TDM | G.709 ODUk |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 0 |
| / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / |
| Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 7 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type = 1 |0| Reserved | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Signal type | Num of stages |TSG | Res | Stage#1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Stage#2 | ... | Stage#N | Padding |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
6.2. OTN and FlexGrid
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| OTN-TDM | G.709 ODUk | SCSC | Lambda |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 0 |
| / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / |
| Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 7 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type = 1 |1| Reserved | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Signal type | Num of stages |TSG | Res | Stage#1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Stage#2 | ... | Stage#N | Padding |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Khuzema Pithewan Expires April 20, 2014 [Page 7]
INTERNET DRAFTdraft-rao-ccamp-mlnmrn-otn-ospfte-ext-03.txt Oct 17, 2013
6.3. OTN and SONET/SDH
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| OTN-TDM | G.709 ODUk | TDM | Sonet/SDH |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 0 |
| / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / |
| Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 7 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type = 1 |1| Reserved | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Signal type | Num of stages |TSG | Res | Stage#1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Stage#2 | ... | Stage#N | Padding |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type = 2 |0| Reserved | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|S|U|K|L|M| Padding |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
6.4. OTN and OTN
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| OTN-TDM | G.709 ODUk | OTN-TDM | G.709 ODUk |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 0 |
| / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / |
| Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 7 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type = 1 |0| Reserved | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Signal type | Num of stages |TSG | Res | Stage#1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Stage#2 | ... | Stage#N | Padding |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type = 1 |1| Reserved | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Signal type | Num of stages |TSG | Res | Stage#1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Stage#2 | ... | Stage#N | Padding |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
7 IANA Considerations
Khuzema Pithewan Expires April 20, 2014 [Page 8]
INTERNET DRAFTdraft-rao-ccamp-mlnmrn-otn-ospfte-ext-03.txt Oct 17, 2013
TBD
8 Security Considerations
TBD
9 References
[RFC5212] K. Shiomoto, Papadimitriou, D.,JL. Le Roux, Vigoureux, M.,
Brungard, D., "Requirements for GMPLS-Based Multi-Layer
and Multi-Region Networks (MLN/ MRN)",RFC 5212, July 2008.
[RFC6001] Papadimitriou, D., Vigoureux, M., Shiomoto, K., Brungard,
D., and JL. Le Roux, "Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Protocol
Extensions for Multi-Layer and Multi-Region Networks
(MLN/MRN)", RFC 6001, October 2010.
[RFC4606] E. Mannie, Perceval, D. Papadimitriou, "Generalized Multi-
Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Extensions for
Synchronous Optical Network (SONET) and Synchronous
Digital Hierarchy (SDH) Control", RFC 4606, Aug 2006
[GMPLS-OTN-OSPF] Traffic Engineering Extensions to OSPF for
Generalized MPLS (GMPLS)Control of Evolving G.709 OTN
Networks
10. Authors' Addresses
Khuzema Pithewan
Infinera
140 Caspian Ct., Sunnyvale, CA 94089
Email: kpithewan@infinera.com
Rajan Rao
Infinera
140 Caspian Ct., Sunnyvale, CA 94089
Email: rrao@infinera.com
Khuzema Pithewan Expires April 20, 2014 [Page 9]
