One document matched: draft-bala-mpls-optical-uni-signaling-00.txt
Internet Draft Osama S. Aboul-Magd
draft-bala-mpls-optical-uni-signaling-00.txt Nortel Networks
Expiration : Jan, 14, 2001 Olga Aparicio
Cable & Wireless USA
Rick Barry
Sycamore Networks
Greg Bernstien
Ciena
Raj Jain
Nayna Networks
LiangYu Jia
Rajiv Dulepet
ONI Systems
Monica Lazer
Jennifer Yates
AT&T
Dimitrios Pendarakis
Bala Rajagopalan
Tellium, Inc.
Robert Rennison
Laurel Networks
Yangguang Xu
Lucent Technologies
Yong Xue
UUNET/Worldcom
John Yu
Zaffire, Inc.
Zhensheng Zhang
Sorrento Networks
Signaling Requirements at the Optical UNI
1. Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.
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.
Page 1 of 17
draft-bala-mpls-optical-uni-signaling-00.txt 7/14/2000
2. Abstract
This draft considers the optical network service model referred
to as the "domain services" model [1]. Under this model, the optical
network provides a set of well-defined services to clients (IP and
others). The signaling and routing interface between the client and
optical networks is referred to as the User-Network Interface (UNI).
This draft describes the services provided over the UNI, and the
requirements on any signaling protocol used to invoke the services.
This draft reflects ongoing work at the Optical Interworking Forum
(OIF) and the Optical Domain Service Interconnect (ODSI) coalition
on the optical UNI [2]. The relevance of this draft to the IETF is
two-fold. First, for the signaling portion of the optical UNI,
extensions of two MPLS signaling protocols are presently under
consideration in the OIF: RSVP with TE extensions and LDP. The
objective of this draft is to guide the adaptation of these
protocols for UNI signaling. Second, to harmonize the signaling of
UNI originated lightpath requests and peer model lightpath
establishment mechanisms [1], alignment between OIF, ODSI and IETF
lightpath parameters and signaling functionality is desirable. This
draft aims to serve this purpose. The content of this draft is
expected to evolve as work progresses on the optical UNI.
3. Introduction
The network model considered in this draft consists of client
networks (IP and others) attached to an optical core network, and
connected to their peers over dynamically established switched
lightpaths. The optical core itself is assumed to be incapable of
processing individual IP packets.
The optical network is assumed to consist of multiple optical
sub-networks interconnected by optical links in a general topology
(referred to as an optical mesh network). This network may be multi-
vendor. Each sub-network itself contains a mesh-connected set of
optical cross-connects (OXCs). This network model is shown in Figure
1.
There are two logical control interfaces identified in Figure 1.
These are the client-optical network interface, and the optical sub-
network interface. These interfaces are also referred to as the
User-Network Interface (UNI) and the Network-Network Interface
(NNI). The services defined at these interfaces to a large degree
determine the type and amount of control flow across them. It is
possible to have a unified service definition across both these
interfaces such that there is virtually no difference in the control
flow across them. In this draft, however, these interfaces are
treated as distinct and the focus is on the UNI.
Expires on 1/14/01 Page 2 of 17
draft-bala-mpls-optical-uni-signaling-00.txt 7/14/2000
Optical Network
+---------------------------------------+
| |
+--------------+ | |
| | | +------------+ +------------+ |
| IP | | | | | | |
| Network +--UNI--+ Optical +---NNI--+ Optical | |
| | | Subnetwork | | Subnetwork | |
+--------------+ | | | +-----+ | |
| +------+-----+ | +------+-----+ |
| | | | |
| NNI NNI NNI |
+--------------+ | | | | |
| | | +------+-----+ | +------+-----+ |
| IP +--UNI--| +--+ | | |
| Network | | | Optical | | Optical | |
| | | | Subnetwork +---NNI--+ Subnetwork | |
+--------------+ | | | | | |
| +------+-----+ +------+-----+ |
| | | |
+-------UNI-------------------UNI-------+
| |
| |
+------+-------+ +------------+
| | | |
| Other Client | |Other Client|
| Network | | Network |
| (e.g., ATM) | | |
+--------------+ +------------+
Figure 1: Optical Network Model
The physical control structure used to realize these logical
interfaces may vary. For instance, for the client-optical interface,
some of the possibilities are:
1.
Direct Interface: An in-band or out-of-band IP control channel
(IPCC) may be implemented between a client and each OXC that it
connects to. With in-band signaling, the signaling messages are
carried over a logical communication channel embedded in the
physical optical links between the client device and OXC. For
example, this could be the overhead bytes in SONET framing or a
dedicated optical wavelength. With out-of-band signaling, the
signaling messages are transmitted over a separate communication
infrastructure that is independent of the optical data links
between the client devices and OXC. For example, this could be a
LAN/WAN based management network infrastructure separate from the
optical network.
This control channel, in-band or out-of-band, is used for
exchanging signaling and routing messages directly between the
Expires on 1/14/01 Page 3 of 17
draft-bala-mpls-optical-uni-signaling-00.txt 7/14/2000
client and the OXC. With a direct interface, the client and the
OXC it connects to support the control plane information exchange.
This is shown in Figure 2.
+-----------------------------+ +-----------------------------+
| | | |
| +-----------------------+ | | +-----------------------+ |
| | | | | | | |
| | UNI Signaling | | | | UNI Signaling | |
| | | | | | | |
| +-----+-----------+-----+ | | +-----+-----------+-----+ |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| +--+-----------+---+ | | +--+-----------+---+ |
| | | | | | | |
| | IP Layer +......IPCC.......+ IP Layer | |
| | | | | | | |
| +------------------+ | | +------------------+ |
| | | |
| Client | | OXC |
+-----------------------------+ +-----------------------------+
Figure 2: Direct Interface
The type of signaling information exchange across the direct
interface would vary depending on the service definition. In
addition, routing information may be exchanged at this interface.
Some choices for the routing protocol are OSPF/ISIS (with traffic
engineering extensions) or BGP. Other directory-based routing
information exchanges are also possible in the near term. The
details of how the IP control channel is realized is outside the
scope of this draft.
2.
Indirect interface: An out-of-band IP control channel may be
implemented between the client and a controlling device in the
optical network to signal service requests and responses. For
instance, a control plane server in the optical network may
receive service requests from clients. Similarly, out-of-band
signaling may be used between a device in the client network
(e.g., a management system) and the OXC, or between devices in
client and optical networks to signal service requests. In these
cases, there is no direct control interaction between clients and
respective OXCs. One reason to have an indirect interface would be
that the OXCs and/or clients do not support a direct interface.
3.
Provisioned interface: In this case, the optical network services
are provisioned and there is no control interactions
between the client and the optical network.
It is essential that both direct and indirect interfaces be
supported by any UNI signaling protocol. Under both these
Expires on 1/14/01 Page 4 of 17
draft-bala-mpls-optical-uni-signaling-00.txt 7/14/2000
interfaces, the entity that performs UNI signaling on the client
side is referred to as UNI-C. The corresponding entity on the
network side is referred to as UNI-N. In the case of the direct
interface, each client device attached to the optical network will
have an UNI-C instance and each OXC attached to a client will have
an UNI-N instance. In the case of the indirect interface, these
entities may be located outside of the client device and OXC, as per
the description in (2) above.
In the following, the service definition and signaling requirements
for realizing the UNI are described.
4. Optical Network Services
The optical network primarily offers discrete capacity, high
bandwidth connectivity in the form of lightpaths. A lightpath is
established between two termination points in the optical network,
to which client devices are attached. The properties of the
lightpaths are defined by the attributes specified during lightpath
establishment or via acceptable modification requests.
The notion of "user groups" are considered as integral to lightpath
establishment in this draft. A user group defines a community of
client devices with restrictions on connectivity from devices
outside this group. The requirements on lightpath termination point
and user group identification are described in the next section.
The following actions support lightpath services:
1. Lightpath creation: This action allows a lightpath with the
specified attributes to be created between a pair of termination
points. Each lightpath is assigned a unique identifier by the
optical network, called the lightpath ID, which is used in UNI
signaling messages to reference the lightpath in further
transactions. Lightpath creation may be subject to network-
defined policies (e.g., user group connectivity restrictions) and
security procedures.
2. Lightpath deletion: This action allows an existing lightpath
(referenced by its ID) to be deleted.
3. Lightpath modification: This action allows certain parameters of
the lightpath (referenced by its ID) to be modified. Lightpath
modification may be subject to network-defined policies. Lightpath
modification must be non-destructive, i.e., the success or failure
of the modification procedure must not result in the loss of the
original lightpath.
4. Lightpath status enquiry: This service allows the status of
certain parameters of the lightpath (referenced by its ID) to be
queried.
Additionally, the following "neighbor discovery" procedures may be
Expires on 1/14/01 Page 5 of 17
draft-bala-mpls-optical-uni-signaling-00.txt 7/14/2000
made available over the UNI:
1. Client Registration: This service allows a client to register its
address(es) and user group identifier(s) with the optical network.
2. Client De-Registration: This service allows a client to withdraw
its address(es) and user group identifier(s) from the optical
network.
The registration procedure aids in verifying local port connectivity
between the optical and client devices, and allows each device to
learn the IP address of the other to establish a UNI control
channel. Also, it aids the implementation of a directory service (if
desired) that would allow clients to learn about the reachability of
other remote clients belonging to the same user group. Routing
information exchange between client and optical networks across the
UNI is considered in [3].
Finally, a "service discovery" procedure may be employed as a
precursor to obtaining UNI services. Service discovery allows a
client to determine the static parameters of the interconnection
with the optical network, including the UNI signaling protocols
supported. The protocols for neighbor and service discovery are
different from the UNI signaling protocol itself (for example, see
LMP [6]). The focus of this draft is only on UNI signaling.
5. Identification of Lightpath Termination Points and User Groups
It is assumed that each OXC in an optical network has one or more IP
addresses assigned to it. The address assigned to an OXC is assumed
to be unique within the service domain that supports the UNI.
Lightpath termination points are identified by internal optical
network interface identifiers. It is possible that a physical OXC
interface may in fact contain more than one logical interface on
which lightpaths terminate. For instance, an OC-192 port may
terminate four OC-48 lightpaths. Also, depending on the granularity
of bandwidth allocation, a lightpath may refer to a sub-channel in a
multiplexed stream. The concept of a logical port may be used to
generically identify the local termination point of a lightpath at
an OXC. The complete termination point is therefore identified by
the pair, {IP address, logical port ID}, where the IP address is
associated with the OXC that contains the physical interface and the
logical port ID is an (optional) addressing structure used to
identify a logical port in the OXC. The logical port ID structure
will consist of physical port, channel and sub-channel identifiers.
Because the logical port ID is of local significance only, it must
be unique only with respect to a specific OXC. Furthermore, the
logical port ID is not used for routing a lightpath within the
optical network, but only to identify a termination point within an
OXC. It is, however, possible to directly assign an IP address to
physical or logical ports. In this case, the logical port ID need
not be used.
Expires on 1/14/01 Page 6 of 17
draft-bala-mpls-optical-uni-signaling-00.txt 7/14/2000
It is required that every client be assigned one or more user group
identifiers. User group identification allows the formation of
closed user groups, or virtual private networks of clients. The user
group identifier(s) for each client-optical interface is required to
be registered during UNI neighbor discovery. The format of the user
group identifier may be taken to be the same as the VPN identifier
defined in [4].
6. Signaling Requirements
This section describes the mechanisms that must be available in a
UNI signaling protocol.
6.1 UNI Control Channel
The transport of UNI signaling messages require a UNI control
channel between the UNI-C and the corresponding UNI-N entities. To
implement the control channel, it is necessary for UNI-C and UNI-N
to know each other's IP address. In the case of the direct
interface, the UNI neighbor discovery protocol can be used for this.
The same protocol would allow the optical network to identify the
client and apply any policies that may relate to the establishment
of the UNI control channel. In the case of the indirect interface,
the IP address information must be obtained administratively.
An in-band or an out-of-band transport link should exist between
UNI-C and UNI-N to establish the control channel. To use such a link
for the UNI control channel, the following requirements must
be met:
o The link must be able to carry IP packets from UNI-C to UNI-N;
o The bit rate and minimum transfer size (in bytes) of the link must
be adequate to support this function;
o The link must be secure, or UNI-C and UNI-N must implement
procedures to recognize authorized messages and to prevent
unauthorized access;
o It must be possible for both UNI-C and UNI-N to detect the failure
of the link quickly.
In the case of direct interface, there could be multiple interfaces
between the client and the OXC. In this case, there need be only a
single UNI control channel between them. This control channel can
utilize any one of the many in-band and/or out-of-band transport
links between the devices. Furthermore, as long as there is at least
one link available, the UNI control channel must be maintained
without break.
The UNI-C and UNI-N entities must be able to determine quickly the
failure of an already established UNI control channel. The failure
Expires on 1/14/01 Page 7 of 17
draft-bala-mpls-optical-uni-signaling-00.txt 7/14/2000
of the control channel or the unreachability of the peer UNI
signaling entity does not imply the removal of established
lightpaths. On the other hand, since signaling can be initiated
from either side of the lightpath for lightpath deletion or
modification of certain parameters, it is possible for the
lightpath state information to be different in the network and
client sides when the UNI control channel is not functional.
Thus, when the UNI control channel is affected by a failure (e.g.,
the failure of the transport link or the unreachability of the
peer UNI signaling module), a procedure to synchronize lightpath
state must be implemented after recovery.
6.2 UNI Signaling (Abstract) Messages
The UNI signaling messages that must be supported are described
below. These messages are denoted "abstract", in reference to
the fact that they may be realized in different ways depending on
the signaling protocol used. In the following description, the terms
"initiating UNI-C" and "terminating UNI-C" are used to identify the
entities at two ends of a lightpath that initiate and terminate
signaling actions. With the direct interface, a UNI-C entity at
either end of a lightpath can initiate a signaling action. The UNI-C
entity at the other end then becomes the terminating client. With
some indirect interfaces, the initiating and terminating UNI-C could
be the same entity.
1. Lightpath Create Request: Sent from the initiating UNI-C to UNI-N
to create a lightpath.
2. Lightpath Create Response: Sent from
a. the terminating UNI-C to UNI-N to accept an incoming lightpath
create request.
b. the UNI-N to the initiating UNI-C to indicate the successful
creation of (or failure to create) the lightpath as requested
in (1).
3. Lightpath Delete Request: Sent from
a. the initiating UNI-C to UNI-N to delete a lightpath.
b. the UNI-N to a UNI-C to indicate the deletion of a lightpath
by the network.
4. Lightpath Delete Response: Sent from
a. the terminating UNI-C to UNI-N to acknowledge an incoming
lightpath delete request.
b. the UNI-N to the initiating UNI-C to indicate the successful
deletion of the lightpath as requested in (3).
Expires on 1/14/01 Page 8 of 17
draft-bala-mpls-optical-uni-signaling-00.txt 7/14/2000
5. Lightpath Modification Request: Sent from the initiating UNI-C to
UNI-N to modify the specified lightpath parameters. Modification
must be non-destructive.
6. Lightpath Modification Response: Sent from UNI-N to the
initiating UNI-C to indicate the successful modification of (or
failure to modify) the lightpath parameters requested in (5).
7. Lightpath Status Enquiry: Sent from
a. the initiating UNI-C to UNI-N to enquire about the status
and/or the parameters of the specified lightpath, or all
lightpaths owned by the UNI-C.
b. the UNI-N to either UNI-C to enquire about the status of
the parameters of the specified lightpath, or all lightpaths
owned by the UNI-C.
8. Lightpath Status Response: Sent from the UNI-N to the initiating
UNI-C to indicate the status of lightpath parameters as requested
in (7). Multiple "Lightpath Status Response" messages (one per
lightpath) may be sent by UNI-N when the initiating UNI-C requests
the status of all lightpaths terminating at a particular
interface.
9. Notification: This message is sent autonomously by UNI-N to UNI-C
to indicate a change in the status of the lightpath (e.g.,
unrestorable lightpath failure).
How these messages are mapped to actions within the optical network,
and the signaling protocol used within the optical network to
realize the actions are not concerns at the UNI. Furthermore, the
resolution of conflicts when UNI signaling is concurrently invoked
on both sides of a lightpath to perform certain actions (e.g.,
modify with conflicting parameters) is not considered to be a UNI
signaling issue.
6.3 UNI (Abstract) Message Parameters
The following parameters must be encoded in UNI signaling messages.
Formats for the parameters must be reconciled with the format of
similar parameters being developed for MPLambdaS signaling [5]. The
list below may evolve based on ongoing work in OIF/ODSI UNI
signaling.
6.3.1 Identification
1. Lightpath ID: A network-wide unique identifier for a lightpath.
This identifier is assigned by the optical network. It consists
of the IP address of an OXC along with a locally unique index.
2. Contract ID: A carrier-assigned identification that identifies
the service contract.
Expires on 1/14/01 Page 9 of 17
draft-bala-mpls-optical-uni-signaling-00.txt 7/14/2000
3. Source/destination lightpath termination point ID: This is a
composition of two IDs, an identifier indicating OXC/physical
or logical port (an IP address) and (optional) logical port
information. The latter consists of a port index, a channel
4. User group ID: A VPN identifier as defined in [4].
5. UNI-C ID: IP address of the UNI-C entity.
6.3.2 Service-Related
1. Directionality: Flag that indicates whether the lightpath is uni
or bi-directional. Default is bi-directional.
2. Framing: Framing specifies the format of the signal to be
transported across the UNI. The valid framing options considered
are:
o PDH
o SONET
o SDH
o Digital Wrapper
o LAN Ethernet
o WAN Ethernet
Note that framing represents the framing of the service to be
carried across the optical network. There are often a variety of
physical interfaces and framing formats which can carry the signal
across the UNI between the client and the OXC. For instance, a
DS-3 can be carried in a T3 or within an STS-1 in an OC-48. So
for example, the source UNI may have a PDH T3 physical line
carrying a DS-3 whereas the destination UNI may have a SONET OC-48
interface. A DS-3 connection between the source and destination
would be delivered within an STS-1 of the OC-48 at the
destination. The framing of such a lightpath would be of type PDH.
Two SONET intefaces may request either any STS-1 or a DS-3,
depending on whether the optical network and client devices
distinguish between the two cases.
3. Bandwidth: This specifies the bandwidth of the service and is
interpreted w.r.t. the framing. Note that this is the bandwidth
of the service, not the bandwidth of the physical interfaces.
The latter may differ on each end of the connection.
Expires on 1/14/01 Page 10 of 17
draft-bala-mpls-optical-uni-signaling-00.txt 7/14/2000
o For PDH, the options are DS-0, DS-1, DS-3 ...,E1, E3, ...,
o For SONET, the options are STS-1, STS-2, STS-3, ..., STS-N
o For SDH, the options are STM-1, STM-2, ... STM-N
o For digital wrapper, the options are TBD, possible values
are 2.5 Gbps, 10 Gbps and 40 Gbps.
o For LAN Ethernet the options are 10 Mbps, 100 Mbps, 1 Gbps,
and 10 Gbps
o For WAN Ethernet the options are 10 Gbps
4. Transparency: This is interpreted w.r.t. the framing.
o For SONET/SDH Framing, the options are: PLR-C, STE-C, and
LTE-C.
PLR-C: Physical Layer Regenerator Circuit (PLR-Circuit);
A PLR-Circuit is a SONET/SDH rate and framed point-to-point
circuit. The circuit preserves all SONET/SDH overhead
bytes between clients. The SONET/SDH signal may be
concatenated or channelized but cannot be SONET/SDH TDM de-
multiplexed or multiplexed within the optical internetwork.
STE-C: An STE-Circuit is a SONET/SDH rate and framed
point-to-point circuit. The circuit preserves all
SONET/SDH line overhead bytes between clients but is not
required to preserve the section overhead bytes. The
SONET/SDH signal may be concatenated or channelized but
cannot be SONET/SDH TDM de-multiplexed or multiplexed within
the optical network.
LTE-C: An LTE-Circuit is a SONET/SDH rate and framed point-
to-point circuit between two UNIs. The circuit preserves
the SONET/SDH payload, but is not required to preserve the
section or line overhead bytes. The SONET/SDH signal may be
concatenated or channelized and may be SONET/SDH TDM
de-multiplexed or multiplexed within the optical network
to allow the subrate circuits to be individually routed, or
to allow multiple LTE-Circuits to be multiplexed within the
network to better utilize a network link. Thus, an LTE-
Circuit implies timing and synchronization requirements not
required in PLR-Circuits or STE-Circuits.
It is part of the call acceptance process of the optical network
to determine if the requested service, bandwidth, and
transparency, can be supported by the network and the physical
interfaces at the UNI. For instance, if the requested circuit is a
SONET OC-48c and both physical interfaces are SONET OC-48
interfaces, then it may be possible for the network to support
Expires on 1/14/01 Page 11 of 17
draft-bala-mpls-optical-uni-signaling-00.txt 7/14/2000
PLR-C transparency. However, if one of the two interfaces is an
OC-192 interface, then LTE-C is the only currently defined option.
o There are no transparency options for PDH, Digital Wrapper,
LAN Ethernet, WAN Ethernet.
5. Propagation delay: This specifies the maximum acceptable
propagation delay in milliseconds. Defaults to infinity.
6. Service level: An integer specifying the service level
requested for the lightpath. Different service levels may be
defined by the optical network service provider, encompassing
priority, preemption, protection and other service-distinguishing
parameters. The "service level" parameter encodes the service
type and it is interpreted by the provider. Some values (e.g.,
0-255) should be reserved for future use. The remaining values
are provider specific. Default set by provider.
It is also possible that priority, preemption, etc., could be
separately specified as (optional) parameters.
6.3.3 Routing-related
1. Diversity: A list of n lightpath IDs from which the present
lightpath must be physically diverse in the network. For each
lightpath ID it may specified whether the diversity desired is
link, node or SRLG [1] disjointness.
6.3.4 Miscellaneous
1. Result Code: A code indicating success or failure of certain
operations. For example, a lightpath create request could result
in success or failure. This code may indicate the result as well
as the reason for failure.
2. Status: A code that indicates the status of a lightpath in the
"Lightpath Status Response" message.
6.3.5 Security-related
These parameters are TBD, since the security features provided by
individual protocols (RSVP/LDP) should be used where possible.
6.3.6 Policy, accounting and authorization related
These parameters are TBD.
6.4 Contents of UNI Abstract Messages
The message contents described below may evolve based on ongoing
work, and on the development of security, policy, accounting and
other parameters.
Expires on 1/14/01 Page 12 of 17
draft-bala-mpls-optical-uni-signaling-00.txt 7/14/2000
6.4.1 Lightpath Create Request
This message contains:
1. Source Termination Point, IP address (mandatory)
2. Destination Termination Point, IP address (mandatory)
3. Source Termination Point, Port, Channel, Sub-channel IDs
(optional)
4. Destination Termination Point, Port, Channel, Sub-channel IDs
(optional)
5. Source User Group Identifier (mandatory)
6. Destination User Group Identifier (mandatory)
7. Contract ID (mandatory)
8. Framing (mandatory)
9. Bandwidth (mandatory)
10. Transparency (mandatory)
11. Directionality (optional)
12. Propagation Delay (optional)
13. Service level (optional)
14. Diversity (optional)
UNI-N may assign the channel and/or the sub-channel for the
lightpath being established and return it to the terminating UNI-C
(in the destination channel, sub-channel parameters).
6.4.2 Lightpath Create Response
This message contains:
1. Source Termination Point, IP address (mandatory)
2. Destination Termination Point, IP address (mandatory)
3. Source Termination Point, Port, Channel, Sub-channel IDs
(optional)
4. Destination Termination Point, Port, Channel, Sub-channel IDs
(optional)
5. Source User Group Identifier (mandatory)
6. Destination User Group Identifier (mandatory)
7. Lightpath ID (mandatory)
8. Result code (mandatory)
The lightpath ID is filled in by UNI-N and conveyed to both
initiating and terminating clients. In addition, UNI-N may
assign the channel and/or the sub-channel for the lightpath being
established and return it to the initiating UNI-C (in the source
logical port ID feild).
6.4.3 Lightpath Delete Request
This message contains:
1. Lightpath ID (mandatory)
Expires on 1/14/01 Page 13 of 17
draft-bala-mpls-optical-uni-signaling-00.txt 7/14/2000
6.4.4 Lightpath Delete Response
This message contains:
1. Lightpath ID (mandatory)
2. Result Code (mandatory)
6.4.5 Lightpath Modify Request
This message contains:
1. Lightpath ID (mandatory)
2. Contract ID (mandatory)
3. Lightpath Bandwidth (optional)
4. Service Level (optional)
5. Diversity (optional)
These parameters specify the new values desired for the lightpath
identified.
6.4.6 Lightpath Modify Response
This message contains:
1. Lightpath ID (mandatory)
2. Lightpath Bandwidth (optional)
3. Service Level (optional)
4. Diversity (optional)
5. Result code (mandatory)
These parameters indicate the new values of the parameters after
the success or failure of the modificiation attempt (as indicated
in the result code)
6.4.7 Lightpath Status Enquiry
This message contains:
1. Lightpath ID (optional)
2. UNI-C ID (optional, mandatory if (1) is not present)
If the lightpath ID is not present, then the parameters of all
lightpaths owned by the UNI-C is returned by the network. Otherwise,
the status of the indicated lightpath is returned.
6.4.8 Lightpath Status Response
This message contains:
1. Status (mandatory)
2. Lightpath ID (optional)
3. Source Termination Point, IP address (optional)
4. Destination Termination Point, IP address (optional)
Expires on 1/14/01 Page 14 of 17
draft-bala-mpls-optical-uni-signaling-00.txt 7/14/2000
5. Source Termination Point, Logical Port ID (optional)
6. Destination Termination Point, Logical Port ID (optional)
7. Source User Group Identifier (optional)
8. Destination User Group Identifier (optional)
9. Contract ID (optional)
10. Framing (optional)
11. Bandwidth (optional)
12. Transparency (optional)
13. Directionality (optional)
14. Propagation Delay (optional)
15. Service level (optional)
16. Diversity (optional)
The status parameter indicates the lightpath status, up/non-
existant/failed/in recovery, etc. Other parameters are returned if
necessary (see 6.4.7)
6.4.9 Notification
This message contains:
1. Lightpath ID (mandatory)
2. Status (mandatory)
7. Summary and Conclusion
This draft described the domain services model and the signaling
requirements at the client-optical interface, called the UNI. The
objective of this draft are two-fold: to guide the adaptation of
RSVP/LDP for UNI signaling and to harmonize the signaling mechanisms
and parameter encoding under UNI signaling and peer model lightpath
set-up [1]. This draft reflects the ongoing work at the
OIF and the ODSI, and the contents are expected to evolve as work
progresses on UNI signaling.
8. References
1. J. Luciani, B. Rajagopalan, D. Awduche, B. Jamoussi and B. Cain,
"IP over Optical Networks: A Framework", draft-bala-ip-optical-
framework-01.txt, Work in Progress, July, 2000.
2. G. Bernstein, R. Coltun, J. Moy, and A. Sodder, "Optical Domain
Services Interconnect (ODSI) Functional Specification,"
www.odsi-coalition.com, July, 2000.
3. D. Pendarakis, B. Rajagopalan and D. Saha, "Routing Information
Exchange in Optical Networks," draft-prs-optical-routing-00.ps,
Work in Progress, April, 2000.
4. B. Fox and B. Gleeson, "VPN Identifiers," RFC 2685.
Expires on 1/14/01 Page 15 of 17
draft-bala-mpls-optical-uni-signaling-00.txt 7/14/2000
5. P. Ashwood-Smith et. al, "Generalized MPLS - Signaling
Functional Description", Internet Draft, Work in Progress.
6. J. Lang, et al., "Link Management Protocol," draft-lang-mpls-
lmp-01.txt, Work in progress.
9. Authors' Addresses
Osama S. Aboul-Magd
Nortel Networks
P.O. Box 3511, Station ôCö
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
K1Y û 4H7
Olga Aparicio
Cable & Wireless Global
11700 Plaza America Drive
Reston, VA 20191
703-292-2022
Email: olga.aparicio@cwusa.com
Rick Barry
Sycamore Networks
10 Elizabeth Drive
Chelmsford, MA 01824
email: Rick.Barry@Sycamorenet.Com
Greg Bernstein
Ciena Corporation, Core Switching Division
10201 Bubb Road
Cupertino, CA 95014
Email: greg@ciena.com
Raj Jain
Nayna Networks, Inc.
157 Topaz St.
Milpitas, CA 95035
Phone: 408-956-8000X309
Fax: 408-956-8730
Email: raj@nayna.com
Liangyu Jia, Rajiv Dulepet
ONI Systems Corp.
166 Baypointe Parkway
San Jose, CA 95134
Tel. 408-965-2743
Fax. 408-965-2660
email: {ljia, rdulepet}@oni.com
Expires on 1/14/01 Page 16 of 17
draft-bala-mpls-optical-uni-signaling-00.txt 7/14/2000
Monica A. Lazer
AT&T
900 Rt. 202/206 N
Bedminster NJ 07921
Phone: 908 234 8462
email: mlazer@att.com
Dimitrios Pendarakis, Bala Rajagopalan
Tellium, Inc
2 Crescent Place
Ocean Port, NJ 07757
Email: {dpendarakis, braja}@tellium.com
Robert Rennison
Laurel Networks
2607 Nicholson Road
Sewickley, PA 15143
USA
Tel: +1 (724) 933 7330
Email: robren@laurelnetworks.com
Yangguang Xu
Lucent Technologies, Inc.
21-2A41, 1600 Osgood St.
N. Andover, MA 01845
Tel: (978) 960 6105
Email: xuyg@lucent.com
Yong Xue
UUNET/WorldCom
Ashburn, Virginia
(703)-886-5358
yxue@uu.net
Jennifer Yates
AT&T Labs
180 Park Avenue
Florham Park, NJ, 07932
Email: jyates@research.att.com
John Z. Yu
Zaffire, Inc
2630 Orchard Parkway
San Jose, CA 95134
Ph:(408) 894-7364
Email: jzyu@zaffire.com
Zhensheng Zhang
Sorrento Networks
9990 Mesa Rim Road
San Diego, CA 92121
tel: 858-646-7195
email: zzhang@sorrentonet.com
Expires on 1/14/01 Page 17 of 17
| PAFTECH AB 2003-2026 | 2026-04-23 11:25:41 |