idnits 2.17.00 (12 Aug 2021) /tmp/idnits28185/draft-ali-ccamp-oducn-signal-type-00.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The page length should not exceed 58 lines per page, but there was 5 longer pages, the longest (page 2) being 61 lines Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** There are 7 instances of too long lines in the document, the longest one being 3 characters in excess of 72. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year == The document doesn't use any RFC 2119 keywords, yet seems to have RFC 2119 boilerplate text. == The document seems to contain a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, but was first submitted on or after 10 November 2008. The disclaimer is usually necessary only for documents that revise or obsolete older RFCs, and that take significant amounts of text from those RFCs. If you can contact all authors of the source material and they are willing to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust, you can and should remove the disclaimer. Otherwise, the disclaimer is needed and you can ignore this comment. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- The document date (October 31, 2016) is 2021 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Experimental ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == Missing Reference: 'RFC2119' is mentioned on line 158, but not defined -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 5226 (Obsoleted by RFC 8126) Summary: 1 error (**), 0 flaws (~~), 5 warnings (==), 2 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 CCAMP Working Group Zafar Ali 3 Internet Draft Manoj Kumar 4 Intended status: Experimental Antonello Bonfanti 5 Akshaya Nadahalli 6 Cisco Systems 7 Fatai Zhang 8 Huawei Technologies 10 Expires: April 30, 2017 October 31, 2016 12 RSVP-TE Extension for Beyond 100G Signal Types in 13 G.709 Optical Transport Networks (OTNs) 14 draft-ali-ccamp-oducn-signal-type-00.txt 16 Status of this Memo 18 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 19 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 21 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 22 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 23 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 24 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 26 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six 27 months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other 28 documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts 29 as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in 30 progress." 32 This Internet-Draft will expire on April 30, 2017. 34 Copyright Notice 36 Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 37 document authors. All rights reserved. 39 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 40 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 41 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 42 publication of this document. Please review these documents 43 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with 44 respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this 45 document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in 46 Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without 47 warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. 49 Internet-Draft draft-ali-ccamp-ODUCn-signal-type-00.txt 51 This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF 52 Contributions published or made publicly available before November 53 10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this 54 material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow 55 modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process. 56 Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) 57 controlling the copyright in such materials, this document may not 58 be modified outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative 59 works of it may not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, 60 except to format it for publication as an RFC or to translate it 61 into languages other than English. 63 Abstract 65 RFCs 4328 and 7139 provide signaling extensions in Resource 66 ReserVation Protocol - Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) to control the 67 full set of Optical Transport Network (OTN) features. However, 68 these specifications do not cover the additional Optical channel 69 Data Unit (ODU) containers defined in G.709/Y.1331 for ODUC1, 70 ODUC2, ODUC3, ODUC4, ODUC5, ODUC6, ODUC7, ODUC8 and ODUC9. This 71 document defines new Signal Types for these additional containers. 73 Conventions used in this document 75 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 76 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in 77 this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 78 [RFC2119]. 80 Table of Contents 82 1. Introduction ................................................. 2 83 2. RSVP-TE extension for Beyond 100G Signal Types ............... 3 84 3. Security Considerations .......................................3 85 4. IANA Considerations ...........................................3 86 5. References ....................................................3 87 5.1. Normative References ......................................3 88 5.2. Informative References ....................................4 90 1. Introduction 92 [RFC7139] updates the portions of text related to the Optical 93 channel Data Unit (ODU) described in [RFC4328] to provide 94 extensions to Resource ReserVation Protocol - Traffic 95 Engineering (RSVP-TE) to support control for [G.709-v3] in the 96 OTN-TDM SENDER_TSPEC and OTN-TDM FLOWSPEC objects. However, it 97 does not specify Signal Types for the beyond 100G ODUCn 98 containers defined in [G.709/Y.1331]. This document provides 99 RSVP-TE signaling extensions to support ODUC1, ODUC2, ODUC3, 100 ODUC4, ODUC5, ODUC6, ODUC7, ODUC8 and ODUC9 Signal Types. 102 Internet-Draft draft-ali-ccamp-ODUCn-signal-type-00.txt 104 2. RSVP-TE extension for Beyond 100G Signal Types 106 [RFC7139] defines the format of Traffic Parameters in OTN-TDM 107 SENDER_TSPEC and OTN-TDM FLOWSPEC objects. These traffic 108 parameters have a Signal Type field. This document defines the 109 Signal Types for ODUC1, ODUC2, ODUC3, ODUC4, ODUC5, ODUC6, 110 ODUC7, ODUC8 and ODUC9, as defined in the IANA Considerations 111 section. They are allocated via the Specification Required 112 policy added to the subregistry by [RFC7892]. 114 3. Security Considerations 116 This document does not introduce any additional security issues 117 beyond those identified in [RFC7139]. 119 4. IANA Considerations 121 IANA maintains the "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching 122 (GMPLS) Signaling Parameters" registry that contains the "OTN 123 Signal Type" subregistry. 125 This document request IANA to add the following signal types in the 126 subregistry via the Specification Required policy [RFC5226]: 128 Value Type 129 ----- ---- 130 TBA1 ODUC1 (100Gbps OTN [G.709/Y.1331]) 131 TBA2 ODUC2 (200Gbps OTN [G.709/Y.1331]) 132 TBA3 ODUC3 (300Gbps OTN [G.709/Y.1331]) 133 TBA4 ODUC4 (400Gbps OTN [G.709/Y.1331]) 134 TBA5 ODUC5 (500Gbps OTN [G.709/Y.1331]) 135 TBA6 ODUC6 (600Gbps OTN [G.709/Y.1331]) 136 TBA7 ODUC7 (700Gbps OTN [G.709/Y.1331]) 137 TBA8 ODUC8 (800Gbps OTN [G.709/Y.1331]) 138 TBA9 ODUC9 (900Gbps OTN [G.709/Y.1331]) 140 These Signal Types are carried in the Traffic Parameters in OTN-TDM 141 SENDER_TSPEC and OTN-TDM FLOWSPEC objects [RFC7139]. 143 5. References 145 5.1. Normative References 146 Internet-Draft draft-ali-ccamp-ODUCn-signal-type-00.txt 148 [RFC4328] Papadimitriou, D., Ed., "Generalized Multi-Protocol 149 Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Extensions for G.709 150 Optical Transport Networks Control", RFC 4328, DOI 151 10.17487/RFC4328, January 2006, . 154 [RFC7139] Zhang, F., Ed., Zhang, G., Belotti, S., Ceccarelli, 155 D., and K. Pithewan, "GMPLS Signaling Extensions for 156 Control of Evolving G.709 Optical Transport Networks", 157 RFC 7139, DOI 10.17487/RFC7139, March 2014, 158 . [RFC2119] 159 Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 160 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 162 [RFC7892] Ali, Z., Bonfanti, A., Hartley, M., and F. Zhang, 163 "IANA Allocation Procedures for the GMPLS OTN Signal 164 Type Registry", RFC 7892, DOI 10.17487/RFC7892, May 165 2016, . 167 5.2. Informative References 169 [G.709-v3] ITU-T, "Interfaces for the optical transport 170 network", Recommendation G.709/Y.1331, June 2016. 172 [G.709/Y.1331] ITU-T, " Interfaces for the optical transport 173 network", G.709/Y.1331 (06/16). 175 [RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing 176 an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 177 5226, DOI 10.17487/RFC5226, May 2008, . [G.709-v3] ITU-T, "Interface 179 for the Optical Transport Network (OTN)", G.709/Y.1331 180 Recommendation, February, 2012. 182 Authors' Addresses 184 Zafar Ali 185 Cisco Systems 186 Email: zali@cisco.com 188 Manoj Kumar 189 Cisco System 190 Email: manojk2@cisco.com 192 Akshaya Nadahalli 193 Cisco Systems 194 anadahal@cisco.com 196 Antonello Bonfanti 197 Cisco Systems 198 abonfant@cisco.com 199 Internet-Draft draft-ali-ccamp-ODUCn-signal-type-00.txt 201 Fatai Zhang 202 Huawei Technologies 203 Email: zhangfatai@huawei.com