One document matched: draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-02.txt
Differences from draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-01.txt
Network Working Group Y. Lee
Internet Draft Huawei
Intended status: Informational G. Bernstein
Expires: September 2009 Grotto Networking
D. Li
Huawei
W. Imajuku
NTT
March 3, 2009
Routing and Wavelength Assignment Information Model for Wavelength
Switched Optical Networks
draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-02.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
This Internet-Draft will expire on September 3, 2009.
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
Bernstein and Lee Expires September 3, 2009 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Wavelength Switched Optical Networks March 2009
(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.
Abstract
This document provides a model of information needed by the routing
and wavelength assignment (RWA) process in wavelength switched
optical networks (WSONs). The purpose of the information described
in this model is to facilitate constrained lightpath computation in
WSONs, particularly in cases where there are no or a limited number
of wavelength converters available. This model does not include
optical impairments.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction...................................................3
1.1. Revision History..........................................3
1.1.1. Changes from 01......................................3
2. Terminology....................................................3
3. Routing and Wavelength Assignment Information Model............4
3.1. Dynamic and Relatively Static Information.................4
3.2. Node Information..........................................5
3.2.1. Switched Connectivity Matrix.........................5
3.2.2. Fixed Connectivity Matrix............................6
3.2.3. Shared Risk Node Group...............................6
3.2.4. Wavelength Converter Pool............................6
3.2.4.1. OEO Wavelength Converter Info...................9
3.3. Link Information..........................................9
3.3.1. Link ID.............................................10
3.3.2. Administrative Group................................10
3.3.3. Interface Switching Capability Descriptor...........10
3.3.4. Link Protection Type (for this link)................10
3.3.5. Shared Risk Link Group Information..................10
3.3.6. Traffic Engineering Metric..........................11
3.3.7. Maximum Bandwidth Per Channel.......................11
3.3.8. Switched and Fixed Port Wavelength Restrictions.....11
3.4. Dynamic Link Information.................................12
3.5. Dynamic Node Information.................................12
4. Security Considerations.......................................13
5. IANA Considerations...........................................13
6. Acknowledgments...............................................13
7. References....................................................14
7.1. Normative References.....................................14
Bernstein and Lee Expires September 3, 2009 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Wavelength Switched Optical Networks March 2009
7.2. Informative References...................................14
8. Contributors..................................................15
Author's Addresses...............................................16
Intellectual Property Statement..................................16
Disclaimer of Validity...........................................17
1. Introduction
The purpose of the following information model for WSONs is to
facilitate constrained lightpath computation and as such is not a
general purpose network management information model. In particular
this model has particular value in the cases where there are no or a
limited number of wavelength converters available in the WSON. This
constraint is frequently referred to as the "wavelength continuity"
constraint, and the corresponding constrained lightpath computation
is known as the routing and wavelength assignment (RWA) problem.
Hence the information model must provide sufficient topology and
wavelength restriction and availability information to support this
computation. More details on the RWA process and WSON subsystems and
their properties can be found in [WSON-Frame]. The model defined here
does not currently include impairments however optical impairments
can be accommodated by the general framework presented here.
1.1. Revision History
1.1.1. Changes from 01
Added text on multiple fixed and switched connectivity matrices.
Added text on the relationship between SRNG and SRLG and encoding
considerations.
Added clarifying text on the meaning and use of port/wavelength
restrictions.
Added clarifying text on wavelength availability information and how
to derive wavelengths currently in use.
2. Terminology
CWDM: Coarse Wavelength Division Multiplexing.
DWDM: Dense Wavelength Division Multiplexing.
FOADM: Fixed Optical Add/Drop Multiplexer.
Bernstein and Lee Expires September 3, 2009 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Wavelength Switched Optical Networks March 2009
ROADM: Reconfigurable Optical Add/Drop Multiplexer. A reduced port
count wavelength selective switching element featuring ingress and
egress line side ports as well as add/drop side ports.
RWA: Routing and Wavelength Assignment.
Wavelength Conversion. The process of converting an information
bearing optical signal centered at a given wavelength to one with
"equivalent" content centered at a different wavelength. Wavelength
conversion can be implemented via an optical-electronic-optical (OEO)
process or via a strictly optical process.
WDM: Wavelength Division Multiplexing.
Wavelength Switched Optical Network (WSON): A WDM based optical
network in which switching is performed selectively based on the
center wavelength of an optical signal.
3. Routing and Wavelength Assignment Information Model
We group the following WSON RWA information model into four
categories regardless of whether they stem from a switching subsystem
or from a line subsystem:
o Node Information
o Link Information
o Dynamic Node Information
o Dynamic Link Information
Note that this is roughly the categorization used in [G.7715] section
7.
In the following we use where applicable the reduced Backus-Naur form
(RBNF) syntax of [RBNF] to aid in defining the RWA information model.
3.1. Dynamic and Relatively Static Information
All the RWA information of concern in a WSON network is subject to
change over time. Equipment can be upgraded; links may be placed in
or out of service and the like. However, from the point of view of
RWA computations there is a difference between information that can
change with each successive connection establishment in the network
and that information that is relatively static on the time scales of
connection establishment. A key example of the former is link
Bernstein and Lee Expires September 3, 2009 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Wavelength Switched Optical Networks March 2009
wavelength usage since this can change with connection setup/teardown
and this information is a key input to the RWA process. Examples of
relatively static information are the potential port connectivity of
a WDM ROADM, and the channel spacing on a WDM link.
In this document we will separate, where possible, dynamic and static
information so that these can be kept separate in possible encodings
and hence allowing for separate updates of these two types of
information thereby reducing processing and traffic load caused by
the timely distribution of the more dynamic RWA WSON information.
3.2. Node Information
The node information described here contains the relatively static
information related to a WSON node. This includes connectivity
constraints amongst ports and wavelengths since WSON switches can
exhibit asymmetric switching properties. Additional information could
include properties of wavelength converters in the node if any are
present. In [Switch] it was shown that the wavelength connectivity
constraints for a large class of practical WSON devices can be
modeled via switched and fixed connectivity matrices along with
corresponding switched and fixed port constraints. We include these
connectivity matrices with our node information the switched and
fixed port wavelength constraints with the link information.
Formally,
<Node_Information> ::= <Node_ID> [<SwitchedConnectivityMatrix>]
[<FixedConnectivityMatrix>], [<SRNG>] [<WavelengthConverterPool>]
Where the Node_ID would be an appropriate identifier for the node
within the WSON RWA context.
It is TBD whether multiple switched and fixed connectivity matrices
should optionally be allowed to fully support the most general cases
enumerated in [Switch]. To support multiple matrices each of the
matrices below would need an identifier so that its particular
port/wavelength constraints can be associated.
3.2.1. Switched Connectivity Matrix
The switched connectivity matrix (SwitchConnectivityMatrix)
represents the potential connectivity matrix for asymmetric switches
(e.g. ROADMs and such). Note that this matrix does not represent any
particular internal blocking behavior but indicates which ingress
ports and wavelengths could possibly be connected to a particular
output port. Representing internal state dependent blocking for a
switch or ROADM is beyond the scope of this document and due to its
Bernstein and Lee Expires September 3, 2009 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Wavelength Switched Optical Networks March 2009
highly implementation dependent nature would not be subject to
standardization. This is a conceptual M by N matrix representing the
potential switched connectivity, where M represents the number of
ingress ports and N the number of egress ports. We say this is a
"conceptual" since this matrix tends to exhibit structure that allows
for very compact representations that are useful for both
transmission and path computation [Encode].
SwitchedConnectivityMatrix(i, j) = 0 or 1 depending on whether
ingress port i can connect to egress port j for one or more
wavelengths.
3.2.2. Fixed Connectivity Matrix
The fixed connectivity matrix (FixedConnectivityMatrix) represents
the connectivity for asymmetric fixed devices or the fixed part of a
"hybrid" device [Switch]. This is a conceptual M by N matrix, where M
represents the number of ingress ports and N the number of egress
ports. We say this is a "conceptual" since this matrix tends to
exhibit structure that allows for very compact representations.
FixedConnectivityMatrix(i, j) = 0 or 1 depending on whether ingress
port i is connected to egress port j for one or more wavelengths.
3.2.3. Shared Risk Node Group
SRNG: Shared risk group for nodes. The concept of a shared risk link
group was defined in [RFC4202]. This can be used to achieve a desired
"amount" of link diversity. It is also desirable to have a similar
capability to achieve various degrees of node diversity. This is
explained in [G.7715]. Typical risk groupings for nodes can include
those nodes in the same building, within the same city, or geographic
region.
Since the failure of a node implies the failure of all links
associated with that node a sufficiently general shared risk link
group (SRLG) encoding, such as that used in GMPLS routing extensions
can explicitly incorporate SRNG information.
3.2.4. Wavelength Converter Pool
A WSON node may include wavelength converters. These are usually
arranged into some type of pool to promote resource sharing. There
are a number of different approaches used in the design of switches
with converter pools. However, from the point of view of path
computation we need to know the following:
1. The nodes that support wavelength conversion.
Bernstein and Lee Expires September 3, 2009 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Wavelength Switched Optical Networks March 2009
2. The accessibility and availability of a wavelength converter to
convert from a given ingress wavelength on a particular ingress
port to a desired egress wavelength on a particular egress port.
3. Limitations on the types of signals that can be converted and the
conversions that can be performed.
To model point 2 above we can use a similar technique as used to
model ROADMs and optical switches this technique was generally
discussed in [WSON-Frame] and consisted of a matrix to indicate
possible connectivity along with wavelength constraints for
links/ports. Since wavelength converters are considered a scarce
resource we will also want to our model to include as a minimum the
usage state of individual wavelength converters in the pool. Models
that incorporate more state to further reveal blocking conditions on
ingress or egress to particular converters are for further study.
We utilize a three stage model as shown schematically in Figure 1. In
this model we assume N ingress ports (fibers), P wavelength
converters, and M egress ports (fibers). Since not all ingress ports
can necessarily reach the converter pool, the model starts with a
wavelength pool ingress matrix WI(i,p) = {0,1} whether ingress port i
can reach potentially reach wavelength converter p.
Since not all wavelength can necessarily reach all the converters or
the converters may have limited input wavelength range we have a set
of ingress port constraints for each wavelength converter. Currently
we assume that a wavelength converter can only take a single
wavelength on input. We can model each wavelength converter ingress
port constraint via a wavelength set mechanism.
Next we have a state vector WC(j) = {0,1} dependent upon whether
wavelength converter j in the pool is in use. This is the only state
kept in the converter pool model. This state is not necessary for
modeling "fixed" transponder system, i.e., systems where there is no
sharing. In addition, this state information may be encoded in a
much more compact form depending on the overall connectivity
structure [WC-Pool].
After that, we have a set of wavelength converter egress wavelength
constraints. These constraints indicate what wavelengths a particular
wavelength converter can generate or are restricted to generating due
to internal switch structure.
Finally, we have a wavelength pool egress matrix WE(p,k) = {0,1}
depending on whether the output from wavelength converter p can reach
egress port k. Examples of this method being used to model wavelength
Bernstein and Lee Expires September 3, 2009 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Wavelength Switched Optical Networks March 2009
converter pools for several switch architectures from the literature
are given in reference [WC-Pool].
I1 +-------------+ +-------------+ E1
----->| | +--------+ | |----->
I2 | +------+ WC #1 +-------+ | E2
----->| | +--------+ | |----->
| Wavelength | | Wavelength |
| Converter | +--------+ | Converter |
| Pool +------+ WC #2 +-------+ Pool |
| | +--------+ | |
| Ingress | | Egress |
| Connection | . | Connection |
| Matrix | . | Matrix |
| | . | |
| | | |
IN | | +--------+ | | EM
----->| +------+ WC #P +-------+ |----->
| | +--------+ | |
+-------------+ ^ ^ +-------------+
| |
| |
| |
| |
Ingress wavelength Egress wavelength
constraints for constraints for
each converter each converter
Figure 1 Schematic diagram of wavelength converter pool model.
Formally we can specify the model as:
<WavelengthConverterPool> ::= <PoolIngressMatrix>
<IngressPoolConstraints> [<WCPoolState>] <EgressPoolConstraints>
<PoolEgressMatrix>
Bernstein and Lee Expires September 3, 2009 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft Wavelength Switched Optical Networks March 2009
Note that except for <WCPoolState> all the other components of
<WavelengthConverterPool> are relatively static. In addition
<WCPoolState> is a relatively small structure compared potentially to
the others and hence in a future revision of this document maybe
moved to a new section on dynamic node information.
3.2.4.1. OEO Wavelength Converter Info
An OEO based wavelength converter can be characterized by an input
wavelength set and an output wavelength set. In addition any
constraints on the signal formats and rates accommodated by the
converter must be described. Such a wavelength converter can be
modeled by:
<OEOWavelengthConverterInfo> ::= <RegeneratorType> [<BitRateRange>]
[<AcceptableSignals>]
Where the RegeneratorType is used to model an OEO regenerator.
Regenerators are usually classified into three types [G.sup39]. Level
1 provides signal amplification, level 2 amplification and pulse
shaping, and level 3 amplification, pulse shaping and timing
regeneration. Level 2 regenerators can have a restricted bit rate
range, while level 3 regenerators can also be specialized to a
particular signal type.
BitRateRange: indicates the range of bit rates that can be
accommodated by the wavelength converter.
AcceptableSignals: is a list of signals that the wavelength converter
can handle. This could be fairly general for Level 1 and Level 2
regenerators, e.g., characterized by general signal properties such
as modulation type and related parameters, or fairly specific signal
types for Level 3 based regenerators.
3.3. Link Information
MPLS-TE routing protocol extensions for OSPF and IS-IS [RFC3630],
[RFC5305] along with GMPLS routing protocol extensions for OSPF and
IS-IS [RFC4203, RFC5307] provide the bulk of the relatively static
link information needed by the RWA process. WSON networks bring in
additional link related constraints. These stem from WDM line system
characterization, laser transmitter tuning restrictions, and
Bernstein and Lee Expires September 3, 2009 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft Wavelength Switched Optical Networks March 2009
switching subsystem port wavelength constraints, e.g., colored ROADM
drop ports.
In the following summarize both information from existing route
protocols and new information that maybe needed by the RWA process.
<LinkInfo> ::= <LinkID> [<AdministrativeGroup>] [<InterfaceCapDesc>]
[<Protection>] [<SRLG>]... [<TrafficEngineeringMetric>]
[<MaximumBandwidthPerChannel>] <[SwitchedPortWavelengthRestriction>]
[<FixedPortWavelengthRestriction>]
3.3.1. Link ID
<LinkID> ::= <LocalLinkID> <LocalNodeID> <RemoteLinkID>
<RemoteNodeID>
Here we can generally identify a link via a combination of local and
remote node identifiers along with the corresponding local and remote
link identifiers per [RFC4202, RFC4203, RFC5307]. Note that reference
[RFC3630] provides other ways to identify local and remote link ends
in the case of numbered links.
3.3.2. Administrative Group
AdministrativeGroup: Defined in [RFC3630]. Each set bit corresponds
to one administrative group assigned to the interface. A link may
belong to multiple groups. This is a configured quantity and can be
used to influence routing decisions.
3.3.3. Interface Switching Capability Descriptor
InterfaceSwCapDesc: Defined in [RFC4202], lets us know the different
switching capabilities on this GMPLS interface. In both [RFC4203] and
[RFC5307] this information gets combined with the maximum LSP
bandwidth that can be used on this link at eight different priority
levels.
3.3.4. Link Protection Type (for this link)
Protection: Defined in [RFC4202] and implemented in [RFC4203,
RFC5307]. Used to indicate what protection, if any, is guarding this
link.
3.3.5. Shared Risk Link Group Information
SRLG: Defined in [RFC4202] and implemented in [RFC4203, RFC5307].
This allows for the grouping of links into shared risk groups, i.e.,
Bernstein and Lee Expires September 3, 2009 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft Wavelength Switched Optical Networks March 2009
those links that are likely, for some reason, to fail at the same
time.
3.3.6. Traffic Engineering Metric
TrafficEngineeringMetric: Defined in [RFC3630]. This allows for the
definition of one additional link metric value for traffic
engineering separate from the IP link state routing protocols link
metric. Note that multiple "link metric values" could find use in
optical networks, however it would be more useful to the RWA process
to assign these specific meanings such as link mile metric, or
probability of failure metric, etc...
3.3.7. Maximum Bandwidth Per Channel
TBD: Need to check if we still want this.
3.3.8. Switched and Fixed Port Wavelength Restrictions
Switch and fixed port wavelength restrictions
(SwitchedPortWavelengthRestriction, FixedPortWavelengthRestriction)
model the wavelength restrictions that various optical devices such
as OXCs, ROADMs, and waveband multiplexers may impose on a port.
These restrictions tell us what wavelength may or may not be used on
a link and are relatively static. This plays an important role in
fully characterizing a WSON switching device [Switch]. The
SwitchedPortWavelengthRestriction is used with ports specified in the
SwitchedConnectivityMatrix while the FixedPortWavelengthRestriction
is used with ports specified in the FixedConnectivityMatrix.
Reference [Switch] gives an example where both switch and fixed
connectivity matrices are used and both types of constraints occur on
the same port.
<SwitchedPortWavelengthRestriction> ::= <port wavelength restriction>
<FixedPortWavelengthRestriction> ::= <port wavelength restriction>
<port wavelength restriction> ::= <RestrictionKind>
<RestrictionParameters> <WavelengthSet>
<RestrictionParameters> ::= <MaxNumChannels> [<OthersTBD>]...
Where WavelengthSet is a conceptual set of wavelengths,
MaxNumChannels is the number of channels permitted on the port, and
RestrictionKind can take the following values and meanings:
Bernstein and Lee Expires September 3, 2009 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft Wavelength Switched Optical Networks March 2009
SIMPLE: Simple wavelength selective restriction. Max number of
channels indicates the number of wavelengths permitted on the port
and the accompanying wavelength set indicates the permitted values.
WAVEBAND1: Waveband device with a tunable center frequency and
passband. In this case the maximum number of channels indicates the
maximum width of the waveband in terms of the channels spacing given
in the wavelength set. The corresponding wavelength set is used to
indicate the overall tuning range. Specific center frequency tuning
information can be obtained from dynamic channel in use information.
It is assumed that both center frequency and bandwidth (Q) tuning can
be done without causing faults in existing signals.
For example, if the port is a "colored" drop port of a ROADM then the
value of RestrictionKind = SIMPLE for a simple wavelength selective
restriction, the MaxNumberOfChannels = 1, and the wavelength
restriction is just a wavelength set consisting of a single member
corresponding to the frequency of the permitted wavelength. See
[Switch] for a complete waveband example.
3.4. Dynamic Link Information
By dynamic information we mean information that is subject to change
on a link with subsequent connection establishment or teardown.
Currently for WSON the only information we currently envision is
wavelength availability and wavelength in use for shared backup
purposes.
<DynamicLinkInfo> ::= <LinkID> <AvailableWavelengths>
[<SharedBackupWavelengths>]
Where
<LinkID> ::= <LocalLinkID> <LocalNodeID> <RemoteLinkID>
<RemoteNodeID>
AvailableWavelengths is a set of wavelengths currently available on
the link. Given this information and the port wavelength restrictions
we can also determine which wavelengths are currently in use.
SharedBackupWavelengths is a set of wavelengths currently used for
shared backup protection on the link. An example usage of this
information in a WSON setting is given in [Shared].
3.5. Dynamic Node Information
Dynamic node information is used to hold information for a node that
can change frequently. Currently only wavelength converter pool
Bernstein and Lee Expires September 3, 2009 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft Wavelength Switched Optical Networks March 2009
information is included as a possible (but not required) information
sub-element.
<DynamicNodeInfo> ::= <NodeID> [<WavelengthConverterPoolStatus>]
Where NodeID is a node identifier and the exact form of the
wavelength converter pool status information is TBD.
4. Security Considerations
This document discussed an information model for RWA computation in
WSONs. Such a model is very similar from a security standpoint of the
information that can be currently conveyed via GMPLS routing
protocols. Such information includes network topology, link state
and current utilization, and well as the capabilities of switches and
routers within the network. As such this information should be
protected from disclosure to unintended recipients. In addition, the
intentional modification of this information can significantly affect
network operations, particularly due to the large capacity of the
optical infrastructure to be controlled.
5. IANA Considerations
This informational document does not make any requests for IANA
action.
6. Acknowledgments
This document was prepared using 2-Word-v2.0.template.dot.
Bernstein and Lee Expires September 3, 2009 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft Wavelength Switched Optical Networks March 2009
7. References
7.1. Normative References
[Encode] Reference the encoding draft here.
[RBNF] A. Farrel, "Reduced Backus-Naur Form (RBNF) A Syntax Used in
Various Protocol Specifications", work in progress: draft-
farrel-rtg-common-bnf-08.txt.
[RFC3630] Katz, D., Kompella, K., and D. Yeung, "Traffic Engineering
(TE) Extensions to OSPF Version 2", RFC 3630, September
2003.
[RFC4202] Kompella, K., Ed., and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "Routing Extensions
in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
(GMPLS)", RFC 4202, October 2005
[RFC4203] Kompella, K., Ed., and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "OSPF Extensions in
Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
(GMPLS)", RFC 4203, October 2005.
[RFC5305] Li, T. and H. Smit, "IS-IS Extensions for Traffic
Engineering", RFC 5305, October 2008.
[RFC5307] Kompella, K., Ed., and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "IS-IS Extensions
in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
(GMPLS)", RFC 5307, October 2008.
[WSON-Frame] G. Bernstein, Y. Lee, W. Imajuku, "Framework for GMPLS
and PCE Control of Wavelength Switched Optical Networks",
work in progress: draft-ietf-ccamp-wavelength-switched-
framework-01.txt, October 2008.
7.2. Informative References
[Shared] G. Bernstein, Y. Lee, "Shared Backup Mesh Protection in PCE-
based WSON Networks", iPOP 2008, http://www.grotto-
networking.com/wson/iPOP2008_WSON-shared-mesh-poster.pdf .
[Switch] G. Bernstein, Y. Lee, A. Gavler, J. Martensson, " Modeling
WDM Wavelength Switching Systems for use in Automated Path
Computation", http://www.grotto-
networking.com/wson/ModelingWSONswitchesV2a.pdf , June, 2008
Bernstein and Lee Expires September 3, 2009 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft Wavelength Switched Optical Networks March 2009
[G.Sup39] ITU-T Series G Supplement 39, Optical system design and
engineering considerations, February 2006.
[WC-Pool] G. Bernstein, Y. Lee, "Modeling WDM Switching Systems
including Wavelength Converters" to appear www.grotto-
networking.com, 2008.
8. Contributors
Diego Caviglia
Ericsson
Via A. Negrone 1/A 16153
Genoa Italy
Phone: +39 010 600 3736
Email: diego.caviglia@(marconi.com, ericsson.com)
Anders Gavler
Acreo AB
Electrum 236
SE - 164 40 Kista Sweden
Email: Anders.Gavler@acreo.se
Jonas Martensson
Acreo AB
Electrum 236
SE - 164 40 Kista, Sweden
Email: Jonas.Martensson@acreo.se
Itaru Nishioka
NEC Corp.
1753 Simonumabe, Nakahara-ku, Kawasaki, Kanagawa 211-8666
Japan
Phone: +81 44 396 3287
Email: i-nishioka@cb.jp.nec.com
Lyndon Ong
Ciena
Email: lyong@ciena.com
Bernstein and Lee Expires September 3, 2009 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft Wavelength Switched Optical Networks March 2009
Author's Addresses
Greg M. Bernstein (ed.)
Grotto Networking
Fremont California, USA
Phone: (510) 573-2237
Email: gregb@grotto-networking.com
Young Lee (ed.)
Huawei Technologies
1700 Alma Drive, Suite 100
Plano, TX 75075
USA
Phone: (972) 509-5599 (x2240)
Email: ylee@huawei.com
Dan Li
Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
F3-5-B R&D Center, Huawei Base,
Bantian, Longgang District
Shenzhen 518129 P.R.China
Phone: +86-755-28973237
Email: danli@huawei.com
Wataru Imajuku
NTT Network Innovation Labs
1-1 Hikari-no-oka, Yokosuka, Kanagawa
Japan
Phone: +81-(46) 859-4315
Email: imajuku.wataru@lab.ntt.co.jp
Intellectual Property Statement
The IETF Trust takes no position regarding the validity or scope of
any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be
claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology
described in any IETF Document or the extent to which any license
under such rights might or might not be available; nor does it
Bernstein and Lee Expires September 3, 2009 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft Wavelength Switched Optical Networks March 2009
represent that it has made any independent effort to identify any
such rights.
Copies of Intellectual Property disclosures made to the IETF
Secretariat and any assurances of licenses to be made available, or
the result of an attempt made to obtain a general license or
permission for the use of such proprietary rights by implementers or
users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR
repository at http://www.ietf.org/ipr
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
any standard or specification contained in an IETF Document. Please
address the information to the IETF at ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
Disclaimer of Validity
All IETF Documents and the information contained therein are provided
on an "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE
REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE
IETF TRUST AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL
WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY
WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION THEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE
ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS
FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Acknowledgment
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
Internet Society.
Bernstein and Lee Expires September 3, 2009 [Page 17]
| PAFTECH AB 2003-2026 | 2026-04-23 12:27:27 |