CCAMP Working Group Richard Douville Internet Draft Dimitri Papadimitriou Emmanuel Dotaro Expires: January 2005 Alcatel Rauf Izmailov Aleksandar Kolarov NEC John Drake Calient July 2004 Extensions to Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching in support of Waveband Switching draft-douville-ccamp-gmpls-waveband-extensions-05.txt Status of this Memo This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026 [1]. 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/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. 1. Abstract Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) extends the MPLS control plane to encompass layer 2, time-division, wavelength and spatial switching. Along with the current development on IP over optical switching, considerable advances in optical transport systems based on the multiple optical switching granularities have been developed. Currently, GMPLS considers two layers of optical granularity using wavelengths and fibers. By introducing an extended definition of R.Douville et al. - Internet Draft ¡ Expires January 2005 1 draft-douville-ccamp-gmpls-waveband-extensions-05.txt July 2004 waveband switching, this document specifies the corresponding GMPLS extensions, to further integrate optical multi-granularity and benefit from the features of the corresponding switching layers. 2. Summary for Sub-IP Area 2.1. Summary See the Abstract above. 2.2. Where does it fit in the Picture of the Sub-IP Work This work fits the CCAMP box. 2.3. Why is it Targeted at this WG This draft is targeted at the CCAMP WG, because it specifies the extensions to the GMPLS signaling. GMPLS is itself addressed in the CCAMP WG. 2.4. Justification of Work The WG should consider this document as it specifies the extensions to the GMPLS signaling. These extensions are related to the definition of waveband switching and the introduction of optical multi-granularity. 3. Conventions used in this document The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. Other abbreviations and terminology in addition to the [GMPLS-ARCH], [RFC3471] and [GMPLS-RTG] are: WB LSP: WaveBand LSP WBSC: WaveBand Switching Capable WXC: Wavelength Cross-Connect WBXC: WaveBand Cross-Connect FXC: Fiber Cross-Connect OXC: Optical Cross-Connect PXC: Photonic Cross-Connect 4. Introduction The optical multi-granularity concept relies on data plane technologies working at the different switching layers (e.g. wavelength, waveband and fiber). In the context of this memo, the granularities considered inside optical networks are single wavelengths (Lambda LSP), bundles of wavelengths referred to as wavebands (WB LSP), and whole fibers (Fiber LSP). One of the key benefits of multi-granularity is to simplify the switching R.Douville et al. - Internet Draft - Expires January 2005 2 draft-douville-ccamp-gmpls-waveband-extensions-05.txt July 2004 procedures of multiple lower order LSPs (Lambda LSPs, for instance) by switching these LSPs as a single entity at a higher order (e.g. WB LSP or Fiber LSP). To enable such grouping of LSPs, several grooming policies can be defined (either end-to-end or intermediate or any combination). Details concerning these policies are out of scope of the present document. For this purpose, this memo extends the current set of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) capabilities in the optical domain (see [RFC3471]) by taking into account optical components working at the waveband level. Within the set of optical multi- granularity capabilities, three approaches to waveband switching have been identified 1) Inverse Multiplexing 2) Wavelength Concatenation and 3) Waveband Multiplexing/De-multiplexing. The common availability of optical/photonic switching equipment capable to work at the band level motivates the extension of the definition of waveband switching as defined in the GMPLS architecture. Current definition of waveband switching (see [GMPLS- ARCH] and [RFC3471]) refers to inverse multiplexing mechanism or wavelength concatenation ("contiguous" lambdas in a trunk defining a logical waveband at the control plane level). While this definition is still valid and applicable, it does not consider the approach where wavebands have a physical significance, i.e. where the interface is WaveBand-Switch Capable (WBSC). Physical waveband has the ability to switch directly a portion of the frequency spectrum without the need to distinguish between its inner components (e.g. wavelengths or even below in certain known cases), this by using waveband (de)/multiplexing components. The following document groups the extensions to the GMPLS protocol suite required to provide optical multi-granularity (distributed) control and particularly the extensions required for waveband switching support. 5. Extensions to the GMPLS Architecture and Protocol Suite 5.1. Architecture The integration of optical multi-granularity in the GMPLS architecture requires some extensions to the definitions it currently includes. The [GMPLS-ARCH] document considers waveband switching a particular case of lambda switching. As specified, a waveband represents a set of contiguous wavelengths, which can be switched together. This definition of waveband is too restrictive at least on two key aspects: - The first one is that current definition of waveband implies a wavelength composition of the waveband, due to waveband switching by wavelength cross-connects (WXC). This definition provides support to inverse multiplexing mechanism and wavelength R.Douville et al. - Internet Draft - Expires January 2005 3 draft-douville-ccamp-gmpls-waveband-extensions-05.txt July 2004 concatenation. This approach limits the use of waveband to the wavelength switch capable technologies. With waveband switching technologies, the interface does not distinguish between the component optical channels, sub-channels (i.e. timeslots) or packets on the waveband which is switch as a single unit (wide frequency spectrum) like it could be done with the fibers (the penultimate frequency spectrum) on photonic cross-connect (PXC). - The second restrictive point is that the current definition of the waveband does not allow for intermediate grooming. For this purpose, this memo introduces an additional optical granularity representing the waveband. This definition is quite general and backward compatible, it allows requesting a set of contiguous wavelengths (i.e. inverse multiplexing mechanism and wavelength concatenation) but also address the "real" waveband switching and the corresponding set of capabilities. Therefore, the proposed definition better fits into the whole GMPLS control plane architecture. Correspondingly, this memo specifies a new type of interface switching capable interface: the Waveband-Switch Capable Interface (WBSC). The WBSC interface materializes the physical reality of optical waveband in the form of an atomic entity or granularity. As with the introduction of the waveband switching capable interface, a new class of LSP is defined: the WaveBand LSP (WB LSP). The below figure illustrates the hierarchy of the (optical) switching layers and highlights the optical multi-granularity part. The switching element column shows typical (piece of) equipment that can be part of the same node and thus simultaneously support such interfaces. LSP Hierarchy Interfaces Switching Element ------------- ---------- ----------------- Lambda LSP (1) <---> LSC <----> WXC - | WB LSP (1) <---> WBSC <----> WBXC > Optical MG | Fiber LSP <---> FSC <----> FXC - (1) WB LSPs can be supported on both Lambda and WaveBand Switch Capable interfaces depending on the nature of the waveband being requested (inverse multiplexing, wavelength concatenation, or physical waveband). Note that this representation does not aim at restricting interfaces that network elements can support. R.Douville et al. - Internet Draft - Expires January 2005 4 draft-douville-ccamp-gmpls-waveband-extensions-05.txt July 2004 5.2 GMPLS Signalling 5.2.1 Generalized Label Request To support Waveband LSP requests, the values of the LSP Encoding Type, the Switching Type and the Generalized PID (G-PID) fields included in the Generalized Label Request, are extended. The information carried in a Generalized Label Request [RFC3471] is: 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | LSP Enc. Type |Switching Type | G-PID | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ LSP Encoding Type: 8 bits Indicates the encoding of the LSP being requested. The following Value 14 and Type Waveband (Photonic) is added to the existing LSP Encoding Type values to provide Waveband LSP support: Value Type ----- ---- 1 Packet 2 Ethernet 3 ANSI/ETSI PDH 4 Reserved 5 SDH ITU-T G.707 / SONET ANSI T1.105 6 Reserved 7 Digital Wrapper 8 Lambda (photonic) 9 Fiber 10 Reserved 11 FiberChannel 12 G.709 ODUk (Digital Path) 13 G.709 Optical Channel 14 Waveband (Photonic) For example, consider an LSP signaled with "WaveBand" encoding. It is expected that such an LSP would be supported with no electrical conversion and no knowledge of the frequency cutting, modulation and speed by the transit nodes. Other formats normally require framing knowledge, and field parameters are broken into the framing type and speed. Switching Type: 8 bits Indicates the type of switching that should be performed on a particular link. This field is needed for links that advertise more than one type of switching capability. For OXC or PXC enabling Waveband switching, the WBSC value is used to refer to R.Douville et al. - Internet Draft - Expires January 2005 5 draft-douville-ccamp-gmpls-waveband-extensions-05.txt July 2004 such switching capability. Other values of this field are as the Switching Capability field defined in [GMPLS-RTG] Generalized PID (G-PID): 16 bits An identifier of the payload carried by an LSP, i.e. an identifier of the client layer of that LSP. This is used by the nodes at the endpoints of the LSP, and in some cases by the penultimate hop. Standard Ethertype values are used for packet and Ethernet LSPs; other values are defined in [RFC3471]. A waveband can carry a Lambda LSP while a Waveband LSP can be transported on a Fiber LSP, the following additional G-PID values must be considered: see [RFC3471] section 3.1.1 ¡ Required Information, paragraph on Generalized-PID Value Type Technology ----- ---- ---------- 58 Waveband Fiber In addition the following existing values must be updated in order to reflect the transport of Ethernet and SDH/SONET payload over a waveband LSP: 33 Ethernet SDH, Lambda, Waveband, Fiber 34 SDH Lambda, Waveband, Fiber 35 Reserved None 36 Digital Wrapper Lambda, Waveband, Fiber 37 Lambda Waveband, Fiber 5.2.2 Generalized Label In the present context, the waveband label space can make use of the wavelength label format (see [RFC3471]) where each waveband is uniquely identified, on a per node basis, by a Waveband Id (used as label). It is also assumed that a list of tuples of the form [Waveband Id, , <..,..>] is maintained on a local basis. The association between local and remote Waveband Id's can be configured either manually or dynamically using [LMP]. The association between the and the Waveband Id[j] can be configured either manually (by configuration) or dynamically using [LMP]. 5.3. GMPLS Routing 5.3.1 Waveband Interface Switching Capability A new WaveBand-Switch Capability (WBSC) value shall be defined to identify and distinguish the associated switching capability of a link [MPLS-HIER]. If the switching capability of a (TE) link is of R.Douville et al. - Internet Draft - Expires January 2005 6 draft-douville-ccamp-gmpls-waveband-extensions-05.txt July 2004 type WBSC, it means that the node receiving data over this link (fiber) can recognize and switch individual WaveBands on this link (without distinguishing lambdas, channels or packets). Values defined in [GMPLS-RTG] and the one defined in the present context gives the following Interface Switching Capabilities list: Packet-Switch Capable-1 (PSC-1) Packet-Switch Capable-2 (PSC-2) Packet-Switch Capable-3 (PSC-3) Packet-Switch Capable-4 (PSC-4) Layer-2 Switch Capable (L2SC) Time-Division-Multiplex Capable (TDM) Lambda-Switch Capable (LSC) Waveband-Switch Capable (WBSC) Fiber-Switch Capable (FSC) Note that the node that is advertising a given link (i.e., the node that is transmitting) has to know the switching capabilities at the other end of the link (i.e., the receiving end of the link). One way to accomplish this is through configuration. Other options to accomplish this are outside the scope of this document. In brief, if an interface is of type WBSC, it means that the node receiving data over this interface can recognize and switch wavebands (sets of contiguous lambdas) within the interface as a unit (without distinguishing lambdas, sub-channels or packets). On the other hand, an interface that allows for waveband switching belongs (at least) to the WBSC type. 5.3.2. Interface Switching Capability Descriptor The Interface Switching Capability Descriptor is defined in [GMPLS- RTG] and format specified for OSPF and ISIS in [GMPLS-OSPF] and [GMPLS-ISIS], respectively. - For ISIS, the Interface Switching Capability Descriptor is a sub- TLV (of Type 21) of the extended IS reachability TLV (of Type 22). The length is the length of value field in octets. - For OSPF, the Interface Switching Capability Descriptor is a sub- TLV (of Type 15) of the Link TLV (of Type 2). The length is the length of value field in octets. A new value for the Switching Capability (Switching Cap) field is defined here to identify Waveband-Switch Capable (WBSC) interfaces: 151 Waveband Switching Capable (WBSC) In the Interface Switching Capability Descriptor (ISCD), when the Switching Capability (Switching Cap) field contains the value for WBSC, the technology specific information field includes the Minimum LSP Bandwidth, which is defined as the minimum number of contiguous R.Douville et al. - Internet Draft - Expires January 2005 7 draft-douville-ccamp-gmpls-waveband-extensions-05.txt July 2004 wavelength constituting a WaveBand entity. The Maximum LSP is simply defined as the maximum number of contiguous wavelength that can constitute a WaveBand entity. Additional technology specific information MAY also be considered such as the channel spacing, regeneration or conversion capabilities. It is also expected here that the corresponding properties (for instance, the number of wavelength supported per wavebands or wavelength spacing) to be grouped and a dedicated Resource Class/Color to be assigned to each of these groups allowing for a more efficient path computation (using pruning). 5.4. LSP Regions and Forwarding Adjacencies The information carried in the Switching Capability field (8 bits) of the Interface Switching Capability Descriptor (ISCD) is used to construct LSP regions, and determine regions' boundaries as defined in [MPLS-HIER]. The introduction of the new WBSC Interface Switching Capability define a new ordering among the switching capabilities: PSC-1 < PSC- 2 < PSC-3 < PSC-4 < L2SC < TDM < LSC < WBSC < FSC. Path computation may take into account this WBSC region boundary when computing a path for a LSP. When an LSP need to cross a region boundary, it can trigger the establishment of a Forwarding Adjacency LSP (FA-LSP) at the underlying layer. For instance, when a Lambda LSP or a L2SC LSP needs to cross a WBSC region, it can trigger the establishment of a Waveband FA-LSP or re-use an existing one if a matching is found (see [MPLS-HIER]). 6. Security Considerations No additional security considerations beyond the one covered in [RFC3471]. Also, the routing extensions proposed in this document do not raise any new security concerns. 7. Intellectual Property Considerations The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in this document or the extent to which any license under such rights might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this R.Douville et al. - Internet Draft - Expires January 2005 8 draft-douville-ccamp-gmpls-waveband-extensions-05.txt July 2004 specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at http://www.ietf.org/ipr. The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-ipr@ietf.org. 7.1 IPR Disclosure Acknowledgement By submitting this Internet-Draft, I certify that any applicable patent or other IPR claims of which I am aware have been disclosed, and any of which I become aware will be disclosed, in accordance with [RFC3668]. 8. References 8.1 Normative References [GMPLS-ARCH] E.Mannie (Editor) et al., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Architecture," Internet Draft, Work in progress, draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-architecture- 07.txt, May 2003. [GMPLS-OSPF] K.Kompella et al., "OSPF Extensions in Support of Generalized MPLS," Internet Draft, Work in progress, draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-gmpls-extensions-12.txt, October 2003. [GMPLS-RTG] K.Kompella et al., "Routing Extensions in Support of Generalized MPLS," Internet Draft, Work in Progress, draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-routing-09.txt, October 2003. [LMP] J.P.Lang (Editor) et al. "Link Management Protocol (LMP)," Internet Draft, Work in progress, draft-ietf- ccamp-lmp-10.txt, October 2003. [MPLS-BUNDLE] K.Kompella et al., "Link Bundling in MPLS Traffic Engineering," Internet Draft, draft-ietf-mpls-bundle- 04.txt, August 2002. [MPLS-HIER] K.Kompella et al., "LSP Hierarchy with MPLS TE," Internet Draft, Work in progress, draft-ietf-mpls-lsp- hierarchy-08.txt, August 2002. [RFC2026] S.Bradner, "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, October 1996. [RFC2119] S.Bradner, "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. R.Douville et al. - Internet Draft - Expires January 2005 9 draft-douville-ccamp-gmpls-waveband-extensions-05.txt July 2004 [RFC3209] D.Awduche (Editor) et al., "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP Tunnels," RFC 3209, December 2001. [RFC3471] L.Berger (Editor) et al., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) - Signaling Functional Description," RFC 3471, January 2003. [RFC3473] L.Berger (Editor) et al., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling ¡ Resource ReserVation Protocol ¡ Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions," RFC 3473, January 2003. [RFC3630] D.Katz et al., "Traffic Engineering Extensions to OSPF," RFC 3630, September 2003. [RFC3667] S.Bradner, "IETF Rights in Contributions", BCP 78, RFC 3667, February 2004. [RFC3668] S.Bradner, Ed., "Intellectual Property Rights in IETF Technology", BCP 79, RFC 3668, February 2004. 7.2 Informative References [GMPLS-ISIS] K.Kompella et al., "IS-IS Extensions in Support of Generalized MPLS," Internet Draft, Work in progress, draft-ietf-isis-gmpls-extensions-16.txt, January 2003. [RFC3784] H.Smit and T.Li, "IS-IS Extensions for Traffic Engineering," RFC 3784, June 2003. 8. Author's Addresses Richard Douville (Alcatel) Route de Nozay, 91460 Marcoussis, France Phone: +33 1 6963-4431 Email: richard.douville@alcatel.fr Emmanuel Dotaro (Alcatel) Route de Nozay, 91460 Marcoussis, France Phone: +33 1 6963-4723 Email: emmanuel.dotaro@alcatel.fr Dimitri Papadimitriou (Alcatel) Fr. Wellesplein 1, B-2018 Antwerpen, Belgium Phone: +32 3 240-8491 Email: dimitri.papadimitriou@alcatel.be R.Douville et al. - Internet Draft - Expires January 2005 10 draft-douville-ccamp-gmpls-waveband-extensions-05.txt July 2004 Full Copyright Statement Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights. This document and the information contained herein are provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. R.Douville et al. - Internet Draft - Expires January 2005 11