Network Working Group                                   Tomohiro Otani 
Internet Draft                                      Takehiro Tsuritani 
Updates: RFC3471                                                  KDDI 
Category: Standards Track                                       Dan Li 
                                                                Huawei 
 
Expires: June 2010                                    December 7, 2009 
                                      
      Generalized Labels for Lambda-Switching Capable Label Switching 
                                 Routers 
                                      


             draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g-694-lambda-labels-05.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. 

   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. 

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 
   and restrictions with respect to this document. 



 
 
 
T. Otani et al.           Expires June 2010                   [Page 1] 

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g-694-lambda-labels-05.txt         December 2009 
    

Abstract 

   Technology in the optical domain is constantly evolving and as a 
   consequence new equipment providing lambda switching capability has 
   been developed and is currently being deployed. However, [RFC3471] 
   has defined that a wavelength label (section 3.2.1.1) "only has 
   significance between two neighbors" and global wavelength continuity 
   is not considered. In order to achieve interoperability in a network 
   composed of next generation lambda switch-capable equipment, this 
   document defines a standard lambda label format, being compliant 
   with either [G.694.1](DWDM-grid) or [G.694.2](CWDM-grid). Moreover 
   some consideration on how to ensure lambda continuity with RSVP-TE 
   is provided. This document is a companion to the Generalized Multi-
   Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) signaling. It defines the label 
   format when Lambda Switching is requested in an all optical network. 

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]. 

Table of Contents 

    
   1. Introduction..................................................2 
   2. Assumed network model and related problem statement...........3 
   3. Label Related Formats.........................................6 
      3.1. Wavelength Labels........................................6 
      3.2. DWDM Wavelength Label....................................7 
      3.3. CWDM Wavelength Label....................................8 
   4. Security Considerations.......................................9 
   5. IANA Considerations...........................................9 
   6. Acknowledgments..............................................10 
   7. References...................................................10 
      7.1. Normative References....................................10 
      7.2. Informative References..................................10 
   8. Author's Address.............................................11 
   9. Appendix A. DWDM Example.....................................12 
   10. Appendix B. CWDM Example....................................12 
    
1. Introduction 

   As described in [RFC3945], Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) extends MPLS 
   from supporting only packet (Packet Switching Capable - PSC) 
   interfaces and switching to also include support for four new 
   classes of interfaces and switching: 
 
 
T. Otani et al.           Expires June 2010                   [Page 2] 

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g-694-lambda-labels-05.txt         December 2009 
    

      o Layer-2 Switch Capable (L2SC) 

      o Time-Division Multiplex (TDM) 

      o Lambda Switch Capable (LSC) 

      o Fiber-Switch Capable (FSC). 

   A functional description of the extensions to MPLS signaling needed 
   to support new classes of interfaces and switching is provided in 
   [RFC3471]. 

   This document presents details that are specific to the use of GMPLS 
   with a new generation of Lambda Switch Capable (LSC) equipment. 
   Technologies such as Reconfigurable Optical Add/Drop Multiplex (ROADM) 
   and Wavelength Cross-Connect (WXC) operate at the wavelength 
   switching level. As such, the wavelength is important information 
   that is necessary to set up a wavelength-based LSP appropriately and 
   the wavelength defined in [G.694.1] or [G.694.2] is widely utilized. 

2. Assumed network model and related problem statement 

   Figure 1 depicts an all-optically switched network consisting of 
   different vendor's optical network domains. Vendor A's network 
   consists of ROADM or WXC, and vendor B's network consists of number 
   of photonic cross-connect (PXC) and Dense wavelength division 
   multiplexing (DWDM) multiplexer & demultiplexer, otherwise both 
   vendors' networks might be based on the same technology. 

   In this case, the use of standardized wavelength label information is 
   quite significant to establish a wavelength-based LSP. It is also an 
   important constraint when conducting CSPF calculation for RSVP-TE 
   signaling. The way the Constrained Shortest Path First (CSPF) is 
   performed is outside the scope of this document. 

   It is needless to say, a LSP must be appropriately provisioned 
   between a selected pair of ports not only within Domain A but also 
   over multiple domains satisfying wavelength constraints. 

   Figure 2 illustrates in detail the interconnection between Domain A 
   and Domain B. 






 
 
T. Otani et al.           Expires June 2010                   [Page 3] 

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g-694-lambda-labels-05.txt         December 2009 
    

                                     | 
         Domain A (or Vendor A)      |      Domain B (or Vendor B) 
                                     | 
        Node-1            Node-2     |         Node-6            Node-7 
      +--------+        +--------+   |      +-------+ +-+     +-+ +-------+ 
      | ROADM  |        | ROADM  +---|------+  PXC  +-+D|     |D+-+  PXC  | 
      | or WXC +========+ or WXC +---|------+       +-+W+=====+W+-+       | 
      | (LSC)  |        | (LSC)  +---|------+ (LSC) +-+D|     |D+-+ (LSC) | 
      +--------+        +--------+   |      |       +-|M|     |M+-+       | 
          ||                ||       |      +++++++++ +-+     +-+ +++++++++ 
          ||     Node-3     ||       |       |||||||               ||||||| 
          ||   +--------+   ||       |      +++++++++             +++++++++ 
          ||===|  WXC   +===||       |      | DWDM  |             | DWDM  | 
               | (LSC)  |            |      +--++---+             +--++---+ 
          ||===+        +===||       |         ||                    || 
          ||   +--------+   ||       |      +--++---+             +--++---+ 
          ||                ||       |      | DWDM  |             | DWDM  | 
      +--------+        +--------+   |      +++++++++             +++++++++ 
      | ROADM  |        | ROADM  |   |       |||||||               ||||||| 
      | or WXC +========+ or WXC +=+ |  +-+ +++++++++ +-+     +-+ +++++++++ 
      | (LSC)  |        | (LSC)  | | |  |D|-|  PXC  +-+D|     |D+-+  PXC  | 
      +--------+        +--------+ +=|==+W|-|       +-+W+=====+W+-+       | 
        Node-4            Node-5     |  |D|-| (LSC) +-+D|     |D+-+ (LSC) | 
                                     |  |M|-|       +-+M|     |M+-+       | 
                                     |  +-+ +-------+ +-+     +-+ +-------+ 
                                     |        Node-8             Node-9 
    
           Figure 1 Wavelength-based network model 


















 
 
T. Otani et al.           Expires June 2010                   [Page 4] 

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g-694-lambda-labels-05.txt         December 2009 
    

        +-------------------------------------------------------------+ 
         |          Domain A             |        Domain B             | 
         |                               |                             | 
         |           +---+     lambda 1  |         +---+               | 
         |           |   |---------------|---------|   |               | 
         |       WDM | N |     lambda 2  |         | N | WDM           | 
         |      =====| O |---------------|---------| O |=====          | 
         |  O        | D |        .      |         | D |        O      | 
         |  T    WDM | E |        .      |         | E | WDM    T      | 
         |  H   =====| 2 |     lambda n  |         | 6 |=====   H      | 
         |  E        |   |---------------|---------|   |        E      | 
         |  R        +---+               |         +---+        R      | 
         |                               |                             | 
         |  N        +---+               |         +---+        N      | 
         |  O        |   |               |         |   |        O      | 
         |  D    WDM | N |               |         | N | WDM    D      | 
         |  E   =====| O |      WDM      |         | O |=====   E      | 
         |  S        | D |=========================| D |        S      | 
         |       WDM | E |               |         | E | WDM           | 
         |      =====| 5 |               |         | 8 |=====          | 
         |           |   |               |         |   |               | 
         |           +---+               |         +---+               | 
         +-------------------------------------------------------------+ 
    
     Figure 2 Interconnecting details between two domains 

   In the scenario of Figure 1, consider the setting up of a 
   bidirectional LSP from ingress switch 1 to egress switch 9. In order 
   to satisfy wavelength continuity constraint, a fixed wavelength 
   (lambda 1) needs to be used in domain A and domain B. A Path message 
   will be used for the signaling, the PATH message must contain the 
   upstream label and a label set object; both containing the same 
   lambda. The label set object is made by only one sub channel that 
   must be same as the upstream label. The path setup will continue 
   downstream to switch 9 by configuring each lambda switch based on the 
   wavelength label. This label allows the correct switching of lambda 
   switches and the label contents needs to be used over the inter- 
   domain. As same above, the path setup will continue downstream to 
   switch 9 by configuring lambda switch based on multiple wavelength 
   labels. If the node has a tunable wavelength transponder, the tuning 
   wavelength is considered as a part of wavelength switching operation. 

   Not using a standardized label would add undue burden on the operator 
   to enforce policy as each manufacturer may decide on a different 
   representation and therefore each domain may have its own label 
   formats. Moreover, manual provisioning may lead to misconfiguration 
   if domain-specific labels are used. 
 
 
T. Otani et al.           Expires June 2010                   [Page 5] 

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g-694-lambda-labels-05.txt         December 2009 
    

   Therefore, a wavelength label should be standardized in order to 
   allow interoperability between multiple domains; otherwise 
   appropriate existing labels are identified in support of wavelength 
   availability. As identical wavelength information, the ITU-T 
   frequency grid specified in [G.694.1] for Dense WDM (DWDM) and 
   wavelength information in [G.694.2] for Coarse WDM (CWDM) are used by 
   LSRs and should be followed as a wavelength label. 

3. Label Related Formats 

   To deal with the widening scope of MPLS into the optical and time 
   domains, several new forms of "label" have been defined in [RFC3471]. 
   This section contains clarifications for the Wavelength label based 
   on [G.694.1] or [G.694.2] and Label Set definition specific for LSC 
   LSRs. 

3.1. Wavelength Labels 

   In section 3.2.1.1 of [RFC3471], a Wavelength label is defined to 
   have significance between two neighbors, and the receiver may need to 
   convert the received value into a value that has local significance. 

   LSC equipment uses multiple wavelengths controlled by a single 
   control channel. In such case, the label indicates the wavelength to 
   be used for the LSP. This document proposes to standardize the 
   wavelength label.  As an example of wavelength values, the reader is 
   referred to [G.694.1] which lists the frequencies from the ITU-T DWDM 
   frequency grid.  The same can be done for CWDM technology by using 
   the wavelength defined in [G.694.2]. In that sense, we can call 
   wavelength labels. 

   Since the ITU-T DWDM grid is based on nominal central frequencies, we 
   need to indicate the appropriate table, the channel spacing in the 
   grid and a value n that allows the calculation of the frequency. That 
   value can be positive or negative. 

   The frequency is calculated as such in [G.694.1]: 

        Frequency (THz) = 193.1 THz + n * channel spacing (THz) 

   , where n is a two's-complement integer (positive, negative or 0) and 
   channel spacing is defined to be 0.0125, 0.025, 0.05 or 0.1 THz. When 
   wider channel spacing such as 0.2 THz is utilized, the combination of 
   narrower channel spacing and the value n can provide proper frequency 
   with that channel spacing. Channel spacing is not utilized to 
   indicate the LSR capability but only to specify a frequency in 
   signaling. 
 
 
T. Otani et al.           Expires June 2010                   [Page 6] 

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g-694-lambda-labels-05.txt         December 2009 
    

   For the other example of the case of the ITU-T CWDM grid, the spacing 
   between different channels was defined to be 20nm, so we need to pass 
   the wavelength value in nm in this case. Examples of CWDM wavelengths 
   are 1471, 1491, etc. nm. 

   The wavelength is calculated as follows 

        Wavelength (nm) = 1471 nm + n * 20 nm 

   , where n is a two's-complement integer (positive, negative or 0). 
   The grids listed in [G.694.1] and [G.694.2] are not numbered and 
   change with the changing frequency spacing as technology advances, so 
   an index is not appropriate in this case. 

3.2. DWDM Wavelength Label 

   For the case of DWDM, the information carried in a Wavelength label 
   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 
         +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
         |Grid | C.S   |    Reserved     |              n                | 
         +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
    
   (1) Grid: 3 bits 

   The value for grid is set to 1 for ITU-T DWDM Grid as defined in 
   [G.694.1]. 

    
         +----------+---------+ 
         |   Grid   |  Value  | 
         +----------+---------+ 
         | Reserved |    0    | 
         +----------+---------+ 
         |ITU-T DWDM|    1    | 
         +----------+---------+ 
         |ITU-T CWDM|    2    | 
         +----------+---------+ 
         |Future use|  3 - 7  | 
         +----------+---------+ 
    
   (2) C.S.(channel spacing): 4 bits 

   DWDM channel spacing is defined as follows. 
 
 
T. Otani et al.           Expires June 2010                   [Page 7] 

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g-694-lambda-labels-05.txt         December 2009 
    

    
         +----------+---------+ 
         | C.S(GHz) |  Value  | 
         +----------+---------+ 
         | Reserved |    0    | 
         +----------+---------+ 
         |    100   |    1    | 
         +----------+---------+ 
         |    50    |    2    | 
         +----------+---------+ 
         |    25    |    3    | 
         +----------+---------+ 
         |    12.5  |    4    | 
         +----------+---------+ 
         |Future use|  5 - 15 | 
         +----------+---------+ 
    
   (3) n: 16 bits 

   n is a two's-complement integer to take either a negative, zero or a 
   positive value. The value used to compute the frequency as shown 
   above. 

3.3. CWDM Wavelength Label 

   For the case of CWDM, the information carried in a Wavelength label 
   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 
         +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
         |Grid | C.S   |     Reserved    |                n              | 
         +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
    
   The structure of the label in the case of CWDM is the same as that of 
   DWDM case. 

   (1) Grid: 3 bits 

   The value for grid is set to 2 for ITU-T CWDM Grid as defined in 
   [G.694.2]. 





 
 
T. Otani et al.           Expires June 2010                   [Page 8] 

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g-694-lambda-labels-05.txt         December 2009 
    

    
         +----------+---------+ 
         |   Grid   |  Value  | 
         +----------+---------+ 
         | Reserved |    0    | 
         +----------+---------+ 
         |ITU-T DWDM|    1    | 
         +----------+---------+ 
         |ITU-T CWDM|    2    | 
         +----------+---------+ 
         |Future use|  3 - 7  | 
         +----------+---------+ 
    
   (2) C.S.(channel spacing): 4 bits 

   CWDM channel spacing is defined as follows. 

    
         +----------+---------+ 
         | C.S(nm)  |  Value  | 
         +----------+---------+ 
         | Reserved |    0    | 
         +----------+---------+ 
         |    20    |    1    | 
         +----------+---------+ 
         |Future use|  2 - 15 | 
         +----------+---------+ 
    
   (3) n: 16 bits 

   n is a two's-complement integer. The value used to compute the 
   wavelength as shown above. 

   We do not need to define a new type as the information stored is 
   either a port label or a wavelength label. Only the wavelength label 
   as above needs to be defined. 

4. Security Considerations 

   This document introduces no new security considerations to [RFC3473]. 
   GMPLS security is described in section 11 of [RFC3471] and refers to 
   [RFC3209] for RSVP-TE. 

5. IANA Considerations 

   This document has no actions for IANA. 

 
 
T. Otani et al.           Expires June 2010                   [Page 9] 

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g-694-lambda-labels-05.txt         December 2009 
    

6. Acknowledgments 

   The authors would like to thank Adrian Farrel, Lawrence Mao, Zafar 
   Ali and Daniele Ceccarelli for the discussion and their comments. 

7. References 

7.1. Normative References 

   [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 
               Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 

   [RFC3209] Awduche, D., Berger, L., Gan, D., Li, T., Srinivasan, V., 
               and G. Swallow, "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP 
               Tunnels", RFC 3209, December 2001. 

   [RFC3471] Berger, L., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching 
               (MPLS) Signaling Functional Description", RFC 3471, 
               January 2003. 

   [RFC3473] Berger, L., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching 
               (MPLS) Signaling - Resource ReserVation Protocol Traffic 
               Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions", RFC 3473, January 2003. 

   [RFC3945] Mannie, E., Ed., "Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching 
               (GMPLS) Architecture", RFC 3945, October 2004. 

7.2. Informative References 

   [G.694.1] ITU-T Recommendation G.694.1, "Spectral grids for WDM 
               applications: DWDM frequency grid", June 2002. 

   [G.694.2] ITU-T Recommendation G.694.2, "Spectral grids for WDM 
               applications: CWDM wavelength grid", December 2003. 












 
 
T. Otani et al.           Expires June 2010                  [Page 10] 

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g-694-lambda-labels-05.txt         December 2009 
    

8. Author's Address 

   Tomohiro Otani
   KDDI Corporation
   2-3-2 Nishishinjuku Shinjuku-ku Tokyo, 163-8003, Japan
   Phone:  +81-3-3347-6006
   Email:  tm-otani@kddi.com

   Takehiro Tsuritani
   KDDI R&D Laboratories Inc.
   2-1-15 Ohara Fujimino-shi Saitama, 356-8502, Japan
   Phone:  +81-49-278-7806
   Email:  tsuri@kddilabs.jp

   Dan Li
   Huawei Technologies
   F3-5-B R&D Center, Huawei Base,
   Shenzhen 518129 China
   Phone: +86 755-289-70230
   Email: danli@huawei.com

   Richard Rabbat
   Google, Inc.
   1600 Amphitheatre Pkwy
   Mountain View, CA 94043
   Email: rabbat@alum.mit.edu

   Sidney Shiba
   Email: sidney.shiba@yahoo.com

   Hongxiang Guo
   Email: hongxiang.guo@gmail.com

   Keiji Miyazaki
   Fujitsu Laboratories Ltd
   4-1-1 Kotanaka Nakahara-ku, Kawasaki Kanagawa, 211-8588, Japan
   Phone: +81-44-754-2765
   Email: miyazaki.keiji@jp.fujitsu.com

   Diego Caviglia
   Ericsson
   16153 Genova Cornigliano, ITALY
   Phone: +390106003736
   Email: diego.caviglia@ericsson.com



 
 
T. Otani et al.           Expires June 2010                  [Page 11] 

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g-694-lambda-labels-05.txt         December 2009 
    

9. Appendix A. DWDM Example 

   Considering the network displayed in figure 1 it is possible to show 
   an example of LSP set up using the lambda labels. 

   Node 1 receives the request for establishing an LSP from itself to 
   Node 9. The ITU-T grid to be used is the DWDM one, the channel 
   spacing is 50Ghz and the wavelength to be used is 193,35 THz. 

   Node 1 signals the LSP via a Path message including a Wavelength 
   Label structured as defined in section 4.2: 

    
          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 
         +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
         |Grid | C.S   |    Reserved     |              n                | 
         +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
    
   Where: 

   Grid = 1 : ITU-T DWDM grid 

   C.S. = 2 : 50 GHz channel spacing 

   n    = 5 : 

        Frequency (THz) = 193.1 THz + n * channel spacing (THz) 

        193.35 (THz) = 193.1 (THz) + n* 0.05 (THz) 

        n = (193.35-193.1)/0.05 = 5 

10. Appendix B. CWDM Example 

   The network displayed in figure 1 can be used also to display an 
   example of signaling using the Wavelength Label in a CWDM environment. 

   This time the signaling of an LSP from Node 4 to Node 7 is considered. 
   Such LSP exploits the CWDM ITU-T grid with a 20nm channel spacing and 
   is to established using wavelength equal to 1331 nm. 

   Node 4 signals the LSP via a Path message including a Wavelength 
   Label structured as defined in section 4.3: 



 
 
T. Otani et al.           Expires June 2010                  [Page 12] 

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g-694-lambda-labels-05.txt         December 2009 
    

    
          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 
         +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
         |Grid | C.S   |    Reserved     |              n                | 
         +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
    
   Where: 

   Grid = 2 : ITU-T CWDM grid 

   C.S. = 1 : 20 nm channel spacing 

   n    = -7 : 

        Wavelength (nm) = 1471 nm + n * 20 nm 

        1331 (nm) = 1471 (nm) + n * 20 nm 

        n = (1331-1471)/20 = -7 

    
























 
 
T. Otani et al.           Expires June 2010                  [Page 13]