draft-ietf-pce-wson-rwa-ext-08.txt   draft-ietf-pce-wson-rwa-ext-09.txt 
Network Working Group Y. Lee, Ed. Network Working Group Y. Lee, Ed.
Internet Draft Huawei Technologies Internet Draft Huawei Technologies
Intended status: Standard Track R. Casellas, Ed. Intended status: Standard Track R. Casellas, Ed.
Expires: November 14, 2018 CTTC Expires: May 5, 2019 CTTC
May 14, 2018 November 4, 2018
PCEP Extension for WSON Routing and Wavelength Assignment PCEP Extension for WSON Routing and Wavelength Assignment
draft-ietf-pce-wson-rwa-ext-08.txt draft-ietf-pce-wson-rwa-ext-09.txt
Abstract Abstract
This document provides the Path Computation Element communication This document provides the Path Computation Element communication
Protocol (PCEP) extensions for the support of Routing and Wavelength Protocol (PCEP) extensions for the support of Routing and Wavelength
Assignment (RWA) in Wavelength Switched Optical Networks (WSON). Assignment (RWA) in Wavelength Switched Optical Networks (WSON).
Lightpath provisioning in WSONs requires a routing and wavelength Lightpath provisioning in WSONs requires a routing and wavelength
assignment (RWA) process. From a path computation perspective, assignment (RWA) process. From a path computation perspective,
wavelength assignment is the process of determining which wavelength wavelength assignment is the process of determining which wavelength
can be used on each hop of a path and forms an additional routing can be used on each hop of a path and forms an additional routing
skipping to change at page 2, line 7 skipping to change at page 2, line 7
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six
months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents
at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as
reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on November 14, 2018. This Internet-Draft will expire on May 5, 2019.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with
respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this
document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in
Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without
skipping to change at page 2, line 33 skipping to change at page 2, line 33
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Terminology....................................................3 1. Terminology....................................................3
2. Requirements Language..........................................3 2. Requirements Language..........................................3
3. Introduction...................................................3 3. Introduction...................................................3
4. Encoding of a RWA Path Request.................................6 4. Encoding of a RWA Path Request.................................6
4.1. Wavelength Assignment (WA) Object.........................6 4.1. Wavelength Assignment (WA) Object.........................6
4.2. Wavelength Selection TLV..................................8 4.2. Wavelength Selection TLV..................................8
4.3. Wavelength Restriction Constraint TLV.....................8 4.3. Wavelength Restriction Constraint TLV.....................8
4.3.1. Link Identifier Field...............................11 4.3.1. Link Identifier Field...............................10
4.3.2. Wavelength Restriction Field........................12 4.3.2. Wavelength Restriction Field........................12
4.4. Signal processing capability restrictions................13 4.4. Signal processing capability restrictions................13
4.4.1. Signal Processing Exclusion XRO Sub-Object..........14 4.4.1. Signal Processing Exclusion XRO Sub-Object..........14
4.4.2. IRO sub-object: signal processing inclusion.........15 4.4.2. IRO sub-object: signal processing inclusion.........14
5. Encoding of a RWA Path Reply..................................15 5. Encoding of a RWA Path Reply..................................15
5.1. Error Indicator..........................................16 5.1. Error Indicator..........................................16
5.2. NO-PATH Indicator........................................17 5.2. NO-PATH Indicator........................................17
6. Manageability Considerations..................................17 6. Manageability Considerations..................................17
6.1. Control of Function and Policy...........................17 6.1. Control of Function and Policy...........................17
6.2. Information and Data Models, e.g. MIB module.............18 6.2. Information and Data Models, e.g. MIB module.............18
6.3. Liveness Detection and Monitoring........................18 6.3. Liveness Detection and Monitoring........................18
6.4. Verifying Correct Operation..............................18 6.4. Verifying Correct Operation..............................18
6.5. Requirements on Other Protocols and Functional Components18 6.5. Requirements on Other Protocols and Functional Components18
6.6. Impact on Network Operation..............................19 6.6. Impact on Network Operation..............................18
7. Security Considerations.......................................19 7. Security Considerations.......................................18
8. IANA Considerations...........................................19 8. IANA Considerations...........................................19
8.1. New PCEP Object..........................................19 8.1. New PCEP Object..........................................19
8.2. New PCEP TLV: Wavelength Selection TLV...................20 8.2. New PCEP TLV: Wavelength Selection TLV...................19
8.3. New PCEP TLV: Wavelength Restriction Constraint TLV......20 8.3. New PCEP TLV: Wavelength Restriction Constraint TLV......19
8.4. New PCEP TLV: Wavelength Allocation TLV..................20 8.4. New PCEP TLV: Wavelength Allocation TLV..................20
8.5. New PCEP TLV: Optical Interface Class List TLV...........21 8.5. New PCEP TLV: Optical Interface Class List TLV...........20
8.6. New PCEP TLV: Client Signal TLV..........................21 8.6. New PCEP TLV: Client Signal TLV..........................21
8.7. New No-Path Reasons......................................21 8.7. New No-Path Reasons......................................21
8.8. New Error-Types and Error-Values.........................22 8.8. New Error-Types and Error-Values.........................21
9. Acknowledgments...............................................22 9. Acknowledgments...............................................22
10. References...................................................22 10. References...................................................22
10.1. Informative References..................................22 10.1. Informative References..................................22
10.2. Normative References....................................24 10.2. Normative References....................................23
11. Contributors.................................................24 11. Contributors.................................................24
Authors' Addresses...............................................25 Authors' Addresses...............................................25
1. Terminology 1. Terminology
This document uses the terminology defined in [RFC4655], and This document uses the terminology defined in [RFC4655], and
[RFC5440]. [RFC5440].
2. Requirements Language 2. Requirements Language
skipping to change at page 4, line 22 skipping to change at page 4, line 22
Routing and Wavelength Assignment (RWA) in Wavelength Switched Routing and Wavelength Assignment (RWA) in Wavelength Switched
Optical Networks (WSON) based on the requirements specified in Optical Networks (WSON) based on the requirements specified in
[RFC6163] and [RFC7449]. [RFC6163] and [RFC7449].
WSON refers to WDM based optical networks in which switching is WSON refers to WDM based optical networks in which switching is
performed selectively based on the wavelength of an optical signal. performed selectively based on the wavelength of an optical signal.
WSONs can be transparent or translucent. A transparent optical WSONs can be transparent or translucent. A transparent optical
network is made up of optical devices that can switch but not network is made up of optical devices that can switch but not
convert from one wavelength to another, all within the optical convert from one wavelength to another, all within the optical
domain. On the other hand, translucent networks include 3R domain. On the other hand, translucent networks include 3R
regenerators that are sparsely placed. In this document, only regenerators that are sparsely placed. The main function of the 3R
wavelength converters that require electrical signal regeneration regenerators is to convert one optical wavelength to another. In
are considered. this document, only wavelength converters that require electrical
signal regeneration are considered.
A Lambda Switch Capable (LSC) Label Switched Path (LSP) may span one A Lambda Switch Capable (LSC) Label Switched Path (LSP) may span one
or several transparent segments, which are delimited by 3R or several transparent segments, which are delimited by 3R
regenerators (typically with electronic regenerator and optional regenerators (typically with electronic regenerator and optional
wavelength conversion). Each transparent segment or path in WSON is wavelength conversion). Each transparent segment or path in WSON is
referred to as an optical path. An optical path may span multiple referred to as an optical path. An optical path may span multiple
fiber links and the path should be assigned the same wavelength for fiber links and the path should be assigned the same wavelength for
each link. In such case, the optical path is said to satisfy the each link. In such case, the optical path is said to satisfy the
wavelength-continuity constraint. Figure 1 illustrates the wavelength-continuity constraint. Figure 1 illustrates the
relationship between a LSC LSP and transparent segments (optical relationship between a LSC LSP and transparent segments (optical
paths). paths).
+---+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +---+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+
| |I1 | | | | | | I2| | | |I1 | | | | | | I2| |
| |o------| |-------[(3R) ]------| |--------o| | | |o------| |-------[(3R) ]------| |--------o| |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
+---+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +---+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+
(X LSC) (LSC LSC) (LSC LSC) (LSC X) SwCap (X LSC) (LSC LSC) (LSC LSC) (LSC X)
<-------> <-------> <-----> <-------> <-------> <-------> <-----> <------->
<-----------------------><----------------------> <-----------------------><---------------------->
Transparent Segment Transparent Segment Transparent Segment Transparent Segment
<-------------------------------------------------> <------------------------------------------------->
LSC LSP LSC LSP
Figure 1 Illustration of a LSC LSP and transparent segments Figure 1 Illustration of a LSC LSP and transparent segments
Note that two optical paths within a WSON LSP do not need to operate Note that two optical paths within a WSON LSP do not need to operate
on the same wavelength (due to the wavelength conversion on the same wavelength (due to the wavelength conversion
capabilities). Two optical paths that share a common fiber link capabilities). Two optical paths that share a common fiber link
skipping to change at page 6, line 22 skipping to change at page 6, line 22
of RWA path computation. See [RFC6566] for more information on of RWA path computation. See [RFC6566] for more information on
optical impairments and GMPLS. optical impairments and GMPLS.
4. Encoding of a RWA Path Request 4. Encoding of a RWA Path Request
Figure 2 shows one typical PCE based implementation, which is Figure 2 shows one typical PCE based implementation, which is
referred to as the Combined Process (R&WA). With this architecture, referred to as the Combined Process (R&WA). With this architecture,
the two processes of routing and wavelength assignment are accessed the two processes of routing and wavelength assignment are accessed
via a single PCE. This architecture is the base architecture from via a single PCE. This architecture is the base architecture from
which the requirements have been specified in [RFC7449] and the PCEP which the requirements have been specified in [RFC7449] and the PCEP
extensions that are going to be specified in this document based on extensions that are going to be specified in this document are based
this architecture. on this architecture.
+----------------------------+ +----------------------------+
+-----+ | +-------+ +--+ | +-----+ | +-------+ +--+ |
| | | |Routing| |WA| | | | | |Routing| |WA| |
| PCC |<----->| +-------+ +--+ | | PCC |<----->| +-------+ +--+ |
| | | | | | | |
+-----+ | PCE | +-----+ | PCE |
+----------------------------+ +----------------------------+
Figure 2 Combined Process (R&WA) architecture Figure 2 Combined Process (R&WA) architecture
skipping to change at page 7, line 33 skipping to change at page 7, line 33
<request>::= <RP> <request>::= <RP>
<ENDPOINTS> <ENDPOINTS>
<WA> <WA>
[other optional objects...] [other optional objects...]
If the WA object is present in the request, it MUST be encoded after If the WA object is present in the request, it MUST be encoded after
the ENDPOINTS object. the ENDPOINTS object. Orderings with respect to the other following
objects are irrelevant.
The format of the Wavelength Assignment (WA) object body is as The format of the Wavelength Assignment (WA) object body is as
follows: follows:
0 1 2 3 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 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Reserved | Flags |M| | Reserved | Flags |M|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Wavelength Selection TLV | | Wavelength Selection TLV |
skipping to change at page 8, line 19 skipping to change at page 8, line 20
o Reserved (16 bits) o Reserved (16 bits)
o Flags (16 bits) o Flags (16 bits)
The following new flags SHOULD be set The following new flags SHOULD be set
. M (Mode - 1 bit): M bit is used to indicate the mode of . M (Mode - 1 bit): M bit is used to indicate the mode of
wavelength assignment. When M bit is set to 1, this indicates wavelength assignment. When M bit is set to 1, this indicates
that the label assigned by the PCE must be explicit. That is, that the label assigned by the PCE must be explicit. That is,
the selected way to convey the allocated wavelength is by means the selected way to convey the allocated wavelength is by means
of Explicit Label Control (ELC) [RFC4003] for each hop of a of Explicit Label Control (ELC) [RFC3471] for each hop of a
computed LSP. Otherwise, the label assigned by the PCE needs computed LSP. Otherwise, the label assigned by the PCE needs
not be explicit (i.e., it can be suggested in the form of label not be explicit (i.e., it can be suggested in the form of label
set objects in the corresponding response, to allow distributed set objects in the corresponding response, to allow distributed
WA. In such case, the PCE MUST return a Label Set Field as WA. In such case, the PCE MUST return a Label Set Field as
described in Section 2.6 of [RFC7579] in the response. See described in Section 2.6 of [RFC7579] in the response. See
Section 5 of this document for the encoding discussion of a Section 5 of this document for the encoding discussion of a
Label Set Field in a PCRep message. Label Set Field in a PCRep message.
4.2. Wavelength Selection TLV 4.2. Wavelength Selection TLV
skipping to change at page 9, line 22 skipping to change at page 9, line 23
<Wavelength Restriction Constraint> ::= <Wavelength Restriction Constraint> ::=
<Action> <Count> <Reserved> <Action> <Count> <Reserved>
(<Link Identifiers> <Wavelength Restriction>)... (<Link Identifiers> <Wavelength Restriction>)...
Where Where
<Link Identifiers> ::= <Link Identifier> [<Link Identifiers>] <Link Identifiers> ::= <Link Identifier> [<Link Identifiers>]
See Section 4.2.1. for the encoding of the Link Identifiers Field. See Section 4.3.1. for the encoding of the Link Identifiers Field.
The Wavelength Restriction Constraint TLV type is TBD, recommended The Wavelength Restriction Constraint TLV type is TBD, recommended
value is TBD. This TLV MAY appear more than once to be able to value is TBD. This TLV MAY appear more than once to be able to
specify multiple restrictions. specify multiple restrictions.
The TLV data is defined as follows: The TLV data is defined as follows:
0 1 2 3 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 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
skipping to change at page 10, line 18 skipping to change at page 10, line 18
are included in the Link Set. Each identifies a separate link are included in the Link Set. Each identifies a separate link
that is part of the set. that is part of the set.
. 1 - Inclusive Range indicates that the Link Set defines a . 1 - Inclusive Range indicates that the Link Set defines a
range of links. It contains two link identifiers. The first range of links. It contains two link identifiers. The first
identifier indicates the start of the range (inclusive). The identifier indicates the start of the range (inclusive). The
second identifier indicates the end of the range (inclusive). second identifier indicates the end of the range (inclusive).
All links with numeric values between the bounds are All links with numeric values between the bounds are
considered to be part of the set. A value of zero in either considered to be part of the set. A value of zero in either
position indicates that there is no bound on the corresponding position indicates that there is no bound on the corresponding
portion of the range. Note that the Action field can be set to portion of the range.
0 when unnumbered link identifier is used.
Note that "interfaces" such as those discussed in the Interfaces MIB Note that "interfaces" such as those discussed in the Interfaces MIB
[RFC2863] are assumed to be bidirectional. [RFC2863] are assumed to be bidirectional.
o Count: The number of the link identifiers (8 bits) o Count: The number of the link identifiers (8 bits)
Note that a PCC MAY add a Wavelength restriction that applies to all Note that a PCC MAY add a Wavelength restriction that applies to all
links by setting the Count field to zero and specifying just a set links by setting the Count field to zero and specifying just a set
of wavelengths. of wavelengths.
Note that all link identifiers in the same list must be of the same Note that all link identifiers in the same list must be of the same
type. type.
o Reserved: Reserved for future use (16 bits) o Reserved: Reserved for future use (16 bits)
o Link Identifiers: Identifies each link ID for which restriction o Link Identifiers: Identifies each link ID for which restriction
is applied. The length is dependent on the link format and the Count is applied. The length is dependent on the link format and the Count
field. See Section 4.2.1. for Link Identifier encoding and Section field. See Section 4.3.1. for Link Identifier encoding and Section
4.2.2. for the Wavelength Restriction Field encoding, respectively. 4.3.2. for the Wavelength Restriction Field encoding, respectively.
4.3.1. Link Identifier Field 4.3.1. Link Identifier Field
The link identifier field can be an IPv4, IPv6 or unnumbered The link identifier field can be an IPv4, IPv6 or unnumbered
interface ID. interface ID.
<Link Identifier> ::= <Link Identifier> ::=
<IPV4 Address> | <IPV6 Address> | <Unnumbered IF ID> <IPV4 Address> | <IPV6 Address> | <Unnumbered IF ID>
The encoding of each case is as follows: The encoding of each case is as follows:
IPv4 prefix Entry IPv4 prefix Entry
0 1 2 3 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 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 | IPv4 address (4 bytes) | | Type = 1 | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| IPv4 address (continued) | Prefix Length | | IPv4 address (4 bytes) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
IPv6 prefix Sub-TLV IPv6 prefix Sub-TLV
0 1 2 3 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 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 | IPv6 address (16 bytes) | | Type = 2 | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| IPv6 address (continued) | | IPv6 address (16 bytes) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| IPv6 address (continued) | | IPv6 address (continued) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| IPv6 address (continued) | | IPv6 address (continued) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| IPv6 address (continued) | Prefix Length | | IPv6 address (continued) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Unnumbered Interface ID Sub-TLV Unnumbered Interface ID Sub-TLV
0 1 2 3 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 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 = 3 | Reserved | | Type = 3 | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| TE Node ID | | TE Node ID |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Interface ID | | Interface ID |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
4.3.2. Wavelength Restriction Field 4.3.2. Wavelength Restriction Field
The Wavelength Restriction Field of the wavelength restriction TLV The Wavelength Restriction Field of the wavelength restriction TLV
is encoded as a Label Set field as specified in [RFC7579] section is encoded as a Label Set field as specified in Section 2.6 in
2.6, as shown below, with base label encoded as a 32 bit LSC label, [RFC7579] with base label encoded as a 32 bit LSC label, defined in
defined in [RFC6205]. See [RFC6205] for a description of Grid, C.S, [RFC6205]. See [RFC6205] for a description of Grid, C.S, Identifier
Identifier and n, as well as [RFC7579] for the details of each and n, as well as [RFC7579] for the details of each action.
action.
0 1 2 3 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 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Action| Num Labels | Length | | Action| Num Labels | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|Grid | C.S | Identifier | n | |Grid | C.S | Identifier | n |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
skipping to change at page 15, line 17 skipping to change at page 15, line 8
Similar to the XRO sub-object the PCC/PCE should be able to include Similar to the XRO sub-object the PCC/PCE should be able to include
particular types of signal processing along the path in order to particular types of signal processing along the path in order to
handle client restriction or multi-domain path computation. handle client restriction or multi-domain path computation.
This is supported by adding the sub-object "processing" defined for This is supported by adding the sub-object "processing" defined for
ERO in [RFC7689] to the PCEP IRO object. ERO in [RFC7689] to the PCEP IRO object.
5. Encoding of a RWA Path Reply 5. Encoding of a RWA Path Reply
This section provides the encoding of a RWA Path Reply for This section provides the encoding of a RWA Path Reply for
wavelength allocation as discussed in Section 4. Recall that wavelength allocation request as discussed in Section 4. Recall that
wavelength allocation can be performed by the PCE by different wavelength allocation can be performed by the PCE by different
means: means:
(a) By means of Explicit Label Control (ELC) where the PCE (a) By means of Explicit Label Control (ELC) where the PCE
allocates which label to use for each interface/node along the allocates which label to use for each interface/node along the
path. path.
(b) By means of a Label Set where the PCE provides a range of (b) By means of a Label Set where the PCE provides a range of
potential labels to allocate by each node along the path. potential labels to allocate by each node along the path.
Option (b) allows distributed label allocation (performed during Option (b) allows distributed label allocation (performed during
skipping to change at page 16, line 11 skipping to change at page 16, line 4
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 6 Wavelength Allocation TLV Encoding Figure 6 Wavelength Allocation TLV Encoding
o Type (16 bits): The type of the TLV. o Type (16 bits): The type of the TLV.
o Length (15 bits): The length of the TLV including the Type and o Length (15 bits): The length of the TLV including the Type and
Length fields. Length fields.
o M (Mode): 1 bit o M (Mode): 1 bit
- 0 indicates the allocation is under Explicit Label Control. - 0 indicates the allocation is under Explicit Label Control.
- 1 indicates the allocation is expressed in Label Sets. - 1 indicates the allocation is expressed in Label Sets.
Note that all link identifiers in the same list must be of the same Note that all link identifiers in the same list must be of the same
type. type.
o Link Identifier (variable): Identifies the interface to which o Link Identifier (variable): Identifies the interface to which
assignment wavelength(s) is applied. See Section 4.2.1. for Link assignment wavelength(s) is applied. See Section 4.3.1. for Link
Identifier encoding. Identifier encoding.
o Allocated Wavelength(s) (variable): Indicates the allocated o Allocated Wavelength(s) (variable): Indicates the allocated
wavelength(s) to the link identifier. See Section 4.2.2 for encoding wavelength(s) to the link identifier. See Section 4.3.2 for encoding
details. details.
This TLV is encoded as an attributes TLV, per [RFC5420], which is This TLV is encoded as an attributes TLV, per [RFC5420], which is
carried in the ERO LSP Attribute Subobjects per [RFC7570]. The type carried in the ERO LSP Attribute Subobjects per [RFC7570]. The type
value of the Wavelength Restriction Constraint TLV is TBD by IANA. value of the Wavelength Restriction Constraint TLV is TBD by IANA.
5.1. Error Indicator 5.1. Error Indicator
To indicate errors associated with the RWA request, a new Error Type To indicate errors associated with the RWA request, a new Error Type
(TDB) and subsequent error-values are defined as follows for (TDB) and subsequent error-values are defined as follows for
skipping to change at page 22, line 24 skipping to change at page 22, line 10
(http://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml#pcep-error-object). (http://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml#pcep-error-object).
Error- Meaning Error-Value Reference Error- Meaning Error-Value Reference
Type Type
--------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------
TDB WSON RWA Error 1: Insufficient [This.I-D] TDB WSON RWA Error 1: Insufficient [This.I-D]
Memory Memory
2: RWA computation {This.I-D] 2: RWA computation {This.I-D]
N o t u s p p o r e t d Not supported
9. Acknowledgments 9. Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Adrian Farrel for many helpful The authors would like to thank Adrian Farrel for many helpful
comments that greatly improved the contents of this draft. comments that greatly improved the contents of this draft.
This document was prepared using 2-Word-v2.0.template.dot. This document was prepared using 2-Word-v2.0.template.dot.
10. References 10. References
skipping to change at page 23, line 8 skipping to change at page 22, line 32
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2863] McCloghrie, K. and F. Kastenholz, "The Interfaces Group [RFC2863] McCloghrie, K. and F. Kastenholz, "The Interfaces Group
MIB", RFC 2863, June 2000. MIB", RFC 2863, June 2000.
[RFC4003] Berger, L., "GMPLS Signaling Procedure for Egress [RFC4003] Berger, L., "GMPLS Signaling Procedure for Egress
Control", RFC 4003, February 2005. Control", RFC 4003, February 2005.
[RFC3471] Berger, L. (Editor), "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label
Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Functional Description", RFC
3471. January 2003.
[RFC4655] Farrel, A., Vasseur, J., and J. Ash, "A Path Computation [RFC4655] Farrel, A., Vasseur, J., and J. Ash, "A Path Computation
Element (PCE)-Based Architecture", RFC 4655, August 2006. Element (PCE)-Based Architecture", RFC 4655, August 2006.
[RFC4657] Ash, J. and J. Le Roux, "Path Computation Element (PCE) [RFC4657] Ash, J. and J. Le Roux, "Path Computation Element (PCE)
Communication Protocol Generic Requirements", RFC 4657, Communication Protocol Generic Requirements", RFC 4657,
September 2006. September 2006.
[RFC5440] Vasseur, JP., Ed. and JL. Le Roux, Ed., "Path Computation [RFC5440] Vasseur, JP., Ed. and JL. Le Roux, Ed., "Path Computation
Element (PCE) communication Protocol", RFC 5440, March Element (PCE) communication Protocol", RFC 5440, March
2009. 2009.
skipping to change at page 24, line 16 skipping to change at page 24, line 7
[PCEP-GMPLS] Margaria, et al., "PCEP extensions for GMPLS", draft- [PCEP-GMPLS] Margaria, et al., "PCEP extensions for GMPLS", draft-
ietf-pce-gmpls-pcep-extensions, work in progress. ietf-pce-gmpls-pcep-extensions, work in progress.
[RFC5420] Farrel, A. "Encoding of Attributes for MPLS LSP [RFC5420] Farrel, A. "Encoding of Attributes for MPLS LSP
Establishment Using Resource Reservation Protocol Traffic Establishment Using Resource Reservation Protocol Traffic
Engineering (RSVP-TE)", RFC5420, February 2009. Engineering (RSVP-TE)", RFC5420, February 2009.
[RFC5521] Oki, E, T. Takeda, and A. Farrel, "Extensions to the Path [RFC5521] Oki, E, T. Takeda, and A. Farrel, "Extensions to the Path
Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) for Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) for
Route Exclusions", RFC 5521, April 2009. Route Exclusions", RFC 5521, May 2009.
[RFC6205] Tomohiro, O. and D. Li, "Generalized Labels for Lambda- [RFC6205] Tomohiro, O. and D. Li, "Generalized Labels for Lambda-
Switching Capable Label Switching Routers", RFC 6205, Switching Capable Label Switching Routers", RFC 6205,
January, 2011. January, 2011.
[RFC7570] Margaria, et al., "Label Switched Path (LSP) Attribute in [RFC7570] Margaria, et al., "Label Switched Path (LSP) Attribute in
the Explicit Route Object (ERO)", RFC 7570, July 2015. the Explicit Route Object (ERO)", RFC 7570, July 2015.
[RFC7689] Bernstein et al, "Signaling Extensions for Wavelength [RFC7689] Bernstein et al, "Signaling Extensions for Wavelength
Switched Optical Networks", RFC 7689, November 2015. Switched Optical Networks", RFC 7689, November 2015.
 End of changes. 36 change blocks. 
45 lines changed or deleted 47 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/