Internet DRAFT - draft-zhang-ccamp-flexible-grid-rsvp-te-ext

draft-zhang-ccamp-flexible-grid-rsvp-te-ext



Network Working Group                                       Fatai Zhang 
Internet-Draft                                               Xian Zhang         
Intended status: Standards Track                                 Huawei 
                                                          Adrian Farrel 
                                                     Old Dog Consulting 
                                                 Oscar Gonzalez de Dios  
                                                             Telefonica 
                                                          D. Ceccarelli 
                                                               Ericsson 
Expires: August 14, 2014                              February 14, 2014 
                                      


                                     
        RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions in support of Flexible Grid  
                                      
             draft-zhang-ccamp-flexible-grid-rsvp-te-ext-04.txt 


Abstract 

   This memo describes the extensions to RSVP-TE signaling to support 
   Label Switched Paths in a GMPLS-controlled network that includes 
   devices using the flexible optical grid.  

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. 

   This Internet-Draft will expire on August 12, 2014. 

   Copyright Notice 

Zhang et al              Expires August 2014                   [Page 1] 

draft-zhang-ccamp-flexible-grid-rsvp-te-ext-04.txt        February 2014 
    

   Copyright (c) 2014 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 
   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 ................................................ 2 
   2. Terminology ................................................. 3 
      2.1. Conventions used in this document .......................3 
   3. Requirements for Flexible Grid Signaling .....................3 
      3.1. Slot Width ............................................. 4 
      3.2. Frequency Slot ......................................... 4 
   4. Protocol Extensions ......................................... 5 
      4.1. Traffic Parameters...................................... 5 
         4.1.1. Applicability to Fixed Grid Networks ...............6 
      4.2. Generalized Label....................................... 6 
      4.3. Signaling Procedures.................................... 7 
   5. IANA Considerations ......................................... 7 
      5.1. RSVP Objects Class Types................................ 7 
   6. Manageability Considerations................................. 8 
   7. Implementation Status........................................ 8 
      7.1. Centre Tecnologic de Telecomunicacions de Catalunya (CTTC)8 
   8. Acknowledgments ............................................ 10 
   9. Security Considerations..................................... 10 
   10. References ................................................ 10 
      10.1. Normative References.................................. 10 
      10.2. Informative References................................ 10 
   11. Contributors' Address...................................... 11 
   12. Authors' Addresses .........................................12 
    
    

1. Introduction 

   [G.694.1] defines the Dense Wavelength Division Multiplexing (DWDM) 
   frequency grids for Wavelength Division Multiplexing (WDM) 
   applications. A frequency grid is a reference set of frequencies 
   used to denote allowed nominal central frequencies that may be used 
 
 
Zhang et al              Expires August 2014                  [Page 2] 

draft-zhang-ccamp-flexible-grid-rsvp-te-ext-04.txt        February 2014 
    

   for defining applications that utilize WDM transmission. The channel 
   spacing is the frequency spacing between two allowed nominal central 
   frequencies. All of the wavelengths on a fiber use different central 
   frequencies and occupy a designated range of frequency.  

   Fixed grid channel spacing is selected from 12.5 GHz, 25 GHz, 50 GHz, 
   100 GHz and integer multiples of 100 GHz. But [G.694.1] also defines 
   ''flexible grids'', known as ''flexi-grid''. The terms ''frequency slot'' 
   (i.e., the frequency range allocated to a specific channel and 
   unavailable to other channels within a flexible grid) and ''slot 
   width'' (i.e., the full width of a frequency slot in a flexible grid) 
   are introduced in [G.694.1] to define a flexible grid.  

   [FLEX-FWK] defines a framework and the associated control plane 
   requirements for the GMPLS based control of flexi-grid DWDM networks. 

   [RFC6163] provides a framework for GMPLS and Path Computation 
   Element (PCE) control of Wavelength Switched Optical Networks 
   (WSONs), and [WSON-SIG] describes the requirements and protocol 
   extensions for signaling to set up Label Switched Paths (LSPs) in 
   WSONs.  

   This document describes the additional requirements and protocol 
   extensions for RSVP-TE signaling to set up LSPs in networks that 
   support the flexi-grid.  

2. Terminology  

   For terminology related to flexi-grid, please refer to [FLEX-FWK] 
   and [G.694.1]. 

2.1. 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 RFC-2119 [RFC2119]. 

3. Requirements for Flexible Grid Signaling   

   The architecture for establishing LSPs in a flexi-grid network is 
   described in [FLEX-FWK].  

   An optical spectrum LSP occupies a specific frequency slot, i.e., a 
   range of frequencies. The process of computing a route and the 
   allocation of a frequency slot is referred to as RSA (Routing and 
   Spectrum Assignment). [FLEX-FWK] describes three architectural 
   approaches to RSA: combined RSA, separated RSA, and distributed SA. 
 
 
Zhang et al              Expires August 2014                  [Page 3] 

draft-zhang-ccamp-flexible-grid-rsvp-te-ext-04.txt        February 2014 
    

   The first two approaches are referred to as ''centralized SA'' because 
   both routing and spectrum (frequency slot) assignment are performed 
   by a centralized entity before the signaling procedure.  

   In the case of centralized SA the assigned frequency slot is 
   specified in the RSVP-TE Path message during LSP setup. In the case 
   of distributed SA, the slot width of the flexi-grid LSP is specified 
   in the Path message, allowing the network elements to select the 
   frequency slot to be used when they process the RSVP-TE messages.  

   If the capability to switch or convert the whole optical spectrum 
   allocated to an optical spectrum LSP is not available at some nodes 
   along the path of the LSP, the LSP is subject to the Optical 
   ''Spectrum Continuity Constraint'' as described in [FLEX-FWK].  

   The remainder of this section states the additional requirements for 
   signaling in a flexi-grid network. 

3.1. Slot Width  

   The slot width is an end-to-end parameter representing how much 
   frequency resource is requested for a flexi-grid LSP. It is the 
   equivalent of optical bandwidth, although the amount of bandwidth 
   associated with a slot width will depend on the signal encoding. 

   Different LSPs may request different amounts of frequency resource 
   in flexible grid networks, so the slot width needs to be carried in 
   the signaling message during LSP establishment. This enables the 
   nodes along the LSP to know how much frequency resource has been 
   requested (in a Path message) and has been allocated (by a Resv 
   message) for the LSP.  

3.2. Frequency Slot  

   The frequency slot information identifies which part of the 
   frequency spectrum is allocated on each link for an LSP in a flexi-
   grid network.  

   This information is required in a Resv message to indicate, hop-by-
   hop, the central frequency of the allocated resource. In combination 
   with the slot width indicated in a Resv message (see Section 3.1) 
   the central frequency carried in a Resv message identifies the 
   resources reserved for the LSP (known as the frequency slot).  

   The frequency slot can be represented by the two parameters as 
   follows:  

 
 
Zhang et al              Expires August 2014                  [Page 4] 

draft-zhang-ccamp-flexible-grid-rsvp-te-ext-04.txt        February 2014 
    

      Frequency slot = [(central frequency) - (slot width)/2] ~  
                       [(central frequency) + (slot width)/2]  

   As is common with other resource identifiers (i.e., labels) in GMPLS 
   signaling, it must be possible for the head-end LSP when sending a 
   Path message to suggest or require the central frequency to be used 
   for the LSP. Furthermore, for bidirectional LSPs, the Path message 
   must be able to specify the central frequency to be used for reverse 
   direction traffic.  

   As described in [G.694.1], the allowed frequency slots for the 
   flexible DWDM grid have a nominal central frequency (in THz) defined 
   by: 

   193.1 + n * 0.00625 

   where n is zero or a positive or negative integer. 

   The slot width (in GHz) is defined as: 

   12.5 * m 

   where m is a positive integer. 

   It is possible that implementing a subset of the possible slot 
   widths and central frequencies are supported. For example, an 
   implementation could built where the nominal central frequency 
   granularity is 12.5 GHz (by only requiring values of n that are even) 
   and that only supports slot widths as a multiple of 25 GHz (by only 
   allowing values of m that are even).  

   Further details can be found in [FLEX-FWK].  

4. Protocol Extensions  

   This section defines the extensions to RSVP-TE signaling for GMPLS 
   [RFC3473] to support flexible grid networks.  

4.1. Traffic Parameters  

   In RSVP-TE, the SENDER_TSPEC object in the Path message indicates 
   the requested resource reservation. The FLOWSPEC object in the Resv 
   message indicates the actual resource reservation. 

   As described in Section 3.1, the slot width represents how much 
   frequency resource is requested for a flexi-grid LSP. That is, it 

 
 
Zhang et al              Expires August 2014                  [Page 5] 

draft-zhang-ccamp-flexible-grid-rsvp-te-ext-04.txt        February 2014 
    

   describes the end-to-end traffic profile of the LSP. Therefore, the 
   traffic parameters for a flexi-grid LSP encode the slot width.  

   This document defines new C-Types for the SENDER_TSPEC and FLOWSPEC 
   objects to carry Spectrum Switched Optical Network (SSON) traffic 
   parameters: 

   SSON SENDER_TSPEC: Class = 12, C-Type = TBD1.  

   SSON FLOWSPEC: Class = 9, C-Type = TBD2.  

   The SSON traffic parameters carried in both objects have the same 
   format as shown in Figure 1.  

    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 
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
   |              m                |            Reserved           | 
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
    
                   Figure 1: The SSON Traffic Parameters 
                                      
   m (16 bits): the slot width is specified by m*12.5 GHz.  

   The Reserved bits MUST be set to zero and ignored upon receipt. 

4.1.1. Applicability to Fixed Grid Networks 

   Note that the slot width (i.e., traffic parameters) of a fixed grid 
   defined in [G.694.1] can also be specified by using the SSON traffic 
   parameters. The fixed grid channel spacings (12.5 GHz, 25 GHz, 50 
   GHz, 100 GHz and integer multiples of 100 GHz) are also the 
   multiples of 12.5 GHz, so the m parameter can be used to represent 
   these slot widths.  

   Therefore, it is possible to consider using the new traffic 
   parameter object types in common signaling messages for flexi-grid 
   and legacy DWDM networks.  

4.2. Generalized Label  

   In the case of a flexible grid network, the labels that have been 
   requested or allocated as signaled in the RSVP-TE objects are 
   encoded as described in [FLEX-LBL]. This new label encoding can 
   appear in any RSVP-TE object or sub-object that can carry a label.  


 
 
Zhang et al              Expires August 2014                  [Page 6] 

draft-zhang-ccamp-flexible-grid-rsvp-te-ext-04.txt        February 2014 
    

   As noted in Section 4.2 of [FLEX-LBL], the m parameter forms part of 
   the label as well as part of the traffic parameters. 

4.3. Signaling Procedures  

   There are no differences between the signaling procedure described 
   for LSP control in [FLEX-FWK] and those required for use in a fixed-
   grid network [WSON-SIG]. Obviously, the TSpec, FlowSpec, and label 
   formats described in Section 3 are used. The signaling procedures 
   for distributed SA and centralized SA can be applied.  

5. IANA Considerations 

5.1. RSVP Objects Class Types 

   This document introduces two new Class Types for existing RSVP 
   objects. IANA is requested to make allocations from the "Resource 
   ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP) Parameters" registry using the "Class 
   Names, Class Numbers, and Class Types" sub-registry. 

       Class Number  Class Name                            Reference 
       ------------  -----------------------               --------- 
       9             FLOWSPEC                              [RFC2205] 
        
                     Class Type (C-Type): 
        
                     (TBD2) SSON FLOWSPEC                   [This.I-D] 
        
       Class Number  Class Name                            Reference 
       ------------  -----------------------               --------- 
       12            SENDER_TSPEC                          [RFC2205] 
        
                     Class Type (C-Type): 
     
                     (TBD1) SSON SENDER_TSPEC               [This.I-D] 











 
 
Zhang et al              Expires August 2014                  [Page 7] 

draft-zhang-ccamp-flexible-grid-rsvp-te-ext-04.txt        February 2014 
    

    
   IANA is requested to assign the same value for TBD1 and TBD2, and a 
   value of 8 is suggested.  
    
6. Manageability Considerations  

   This document makes minor modifications to GMPLS signaling, but does 
   not change the manageability considerations for such networks.  
   Clearly, protocol analysis tools and other diagnostic aids 
   (including logging systems and MIB modules) will need to be enhanced 
   to support the new traffic parameters and label formats. 
    
7. Implementation Status 

   [RFC Editor Note: Please remove this entire seciton prior to 
   publication as an RFC.] 

   This section records the status of known implementations of the 
   protocol defined by this specification at the time of posting of 
   this Internet-Draft, and is based on a proposal described in RFC 
   6982 [RFC6982].  The description of implementations in this section 
   is intended to assist the IETF in its decision processes in 
   progressing drafts to RFCs.  Please note that the listing of any 
   individual implementation here does not imply endorsement by the 
   IETF.  Furthermore, no effort has been spent to verify the 
   information presented here that was supplied by IETF contributors.  
   This is not intended as, and must not be construed to be, a catalog 
   of available implementations or their features.  Readers are advised 
   to note that other implementations may exist. 

   According to RFC 6982, "this will allow reviewers and working groups 
   to assign due consideration to documents that have the benefit of 
   running code, which may serve as evidence of valuable 
   experimentation and feedback that have made the implemented 
   protocols more mature.  It is up to the individual working groups to 
   use this information as they see fit." 

7.1. Centre Tecnologic de Telecomunicacions de Catalunya (CTTC) 

   Organization Responsible for the Implementation: 
      Centre Tecnologic de Telecomunicacions de Catalunya (CTTC) 
      Optical Networks and Systems Department 

   Implementation Name and Details: 
      ADRENALINE testbed 
      http://networks.cttc.es/experimental-testbeds/ 

 
 
Zhang et al              Expires August 2014                  [Page 8] 

draft-zhang-ccamp-flexible-grid-rsvp-te-ext-04.txt        February 2014 
    

   Brief Description: 
      Experimental testbed implementation of GMPLS/PCE control plane. 

   Level of Maturity: 
      Implemented as extensions to a mature GMLPS/PCE control plane. 
      It is limited to research / prototyping stages, but it has been 
      used successfully for more than the last five years. 

   Coverage: 
      Support for the Tspec, FlowSpec, and label formats as described  
      version 03 of this document.  Label format support extends to the 
      following RSVP-TE objects and sub-objects: 

         - Generalized Label Object 
         - Suggested Label Object 
         - Upstream Label Object 
         - ERO Label Subobjects 

      It is expected that this implementation will evolve to follow the 
      evolution of this document. 

   Licensing: 
      Proprietary 

   Implementation Experience: 
      Implementation of this document reports no issues. 
      General implementation experience has been reported in a number 
      of journal papers. Contact Ramon Casellas for more information or 
      see 
      
   http://networks.cttc.es/publications/?search=GMPLS&research_area=opt
   ical-networks-systems 

   Contact Information: 
      Ramon Casellas: ramon.casellas@cttc.es 

   Interoperability: 
      No report. 








 
 
Zhang et al              Expires August 2014                  [Page 9] 

draft-zhang-ccamp-flexible-grid-rsvp-te-ext-04.txt        February 2014 
    

8. Acknowledgments 

   This work was supported in part by the FP-7 IDEALIST project under 
   grant agreement number 317999. 
    
9. Security Considerations 

   This document introduces no new security considerations to [RFC3473]. 
    
   See also [RFC5920] for a discussion of security considerations for 
   GMPLS signaling. 
    
10. References 

10.1. Normative References 

   [RFC2119] S. Bradner, "Key words for use in RFCs to indicate 
             requirements levels", RFC 2119, March 1997.  

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

   [G.694.1] ITU-T Recommendation G.694.1 (revision 2), ''Spectral grids 
             for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid'', February 2012. 

   [FLEX-LBL]King, D., Farrel, A. and Y. Li, ''Generalized Labels for 
             the Flexi-Grid in Lambda Switched Capable (LSC) Label 
             Switching Routers'', draft-farrkingel-ccamp-flexigrid-
             lambda-label, work in progress.  

10.2. Informative References 

   [RFC2205] Braden, R., Zhang L., Berson, S., Herzog, S. and S. Jamin, 
             ''Resource ReServation Protocol (RSVP) -- Version 1, 
             Functional Specification', RFC2205, September 1997. 

   [RFC5920] L. Fang et al., "Security Framework for MPLS and GMPLS 
             Networks", RFC 5920, July 2010. 

   [RFC6163] Y. Lee, G. Bernstein and W. Imajuku, "Framework for GMPLS 
             and Path Computation Element (PCE) Control of Wavelength 
             Switched Optical Networks (WSONs)", RFC 6163, April 2011. 


 
 
Zhang et al              Expires August 2014                 [Page 10] 

draft-zhang-ccamp-flexible-grid-rsvp-te-ext-04.txt        February 2014 
    

   [RFC6982] Sheffer, Y. and A. Farrel, "Improving Awareness of Running 
             Code: The Implementation Status Section", RFC 6982, July 
             2013. 

   [RFC Editor Note: This reference can be removed when Section 7 is 
             removed]  

   [FLEX-FWK] Gonzalez de Dios, O,, Casellas R., Zhang, F., Fu, X., 
             Ceccarelli, D., and I. Hussain, ''Framework and 
             Requirements for GMPLS based control of Flexi-grid DWDM 
             networks', draft-ogrcetal-cammp-flexi-grid-fwk, work in 
             progress. 

   [WSON-SIG] G. Bernstein, Sugang Xu, Y. Lee, G. Martinelli and 
             Hiroaki Harai, "Signaling Extensions for Wavelength 
             Switched Optical Networks", draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-
             signaling, work in progress. 

11. Contributors' Address 

   Ramon Casellas  
   CTTC  
   Av. Carl Friedrich Gauss n7  
   Castelldefels, Barcelona 08860  
   Spain  
    
   Email: ramon.casellas@cttc.es
    
   Felipe Jimenez Arribas 
   Telefonica Investigacion y Desarrollo 
   Emilio Vargas 6 
   Madrid,   28045 
   Spain 
   Email: felipej@tid.es
    
   Yi Lin 
   Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. 
   F3-5-B R&D Center, Huawei Base, 
   Bantian, Longgang District 
   Shenzhen 518129 P.R.China 
    
   Phone: +86-755-28972914 
   Email: yi.lin@huawei.com
    
   Qilei Wang 
    
   ZTE 
 
 
Zhang et al              Expires August 2014                 [Page 11] 

draft-zhang-ccamp-flexible-grid-rsvp-te-ext-04.txt        February 2014 
    

   wang.qilei@zte.com.cn 
    
   Haomian Zheng 
    
   Huawei Technologies 
   zhenghaomian@huawei.com 
    
12. Authors' Addresses 

   Fatai Zhang 
   Huawei Technologies 
   Email: zhangfatai@huawei.com
    
   Xian Zhang 
   Huawei Technologies 
   Email: zhang.xian@huawei.com
    
   Adrian Farrel 
   Old Dog Consulting 
   Email: adrian@olddog.co.uk
    
   Oscar Gonzalez de Dios 
   Telefonica Investigacion y Desarrollo 
   Emilio Vargas 6 
   Madrid,   28045 
   Spain 
    
   Phone: +34 913374013 
   Email: ogondio@tid.es
    
   Daniele Ceccarelli 
   Ericsson 
   Via A. Negrone 1/A 
   Genova - Sestri Ponente 
   Italy 
   Email: daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com
    
    








 
 
Zhang et al              Expires August 2014                 [Page 12]