Re: [CCAMP] Update to draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-otn-b100g-applicability

[Jonathan Sadler <[e-mail]>]

HI Adrian,

I will confer with my colleagues in the OIF to determine if this change is acceptable.

Thanks,

Jonathan Sadler

From: CCAMP <[e-mail]> On Behalf Of Adrian Farrel
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2023 4:30 PM
To: 'Daniele Ceccarelli' <[e-mail]>; 'CCAMP' <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] Update to draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-otn-b100g-applicability

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Thanks for driving this, Daniele. And thanks to the authors for coming up with a small change that addresses the point.

It’s always good to catch issues even if it is frustrating when they come late.

The proposed text looks very clear to me.

Is there anyone on this list active in the OIF who could short-cut potential ping-pong?

Cheers,
Adrian

From: CCAMP <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> On Behalf Of Daniele Ceccarelli
Sent: 23 January 2023 12:31
To: CCAMP <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Subject: [CCAMP] Update to draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-otn-b100g-applicability


Hi WG,



Some issues and concerns have been raised with respect to draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-otn-b100g-applicability, including discussions within the OIF.

The OIF might be planning to send a liaison to us but given the fact that the draft is in Editor Queue we need to move fast.

The major concern is about the need to advertise the 5Gbit/s OPUCn tributary slot. The answer is "no, it's not needed". Since this is not 100% clear from the text we're planning to ask John and the Editor Queue to update section 4.3 as follows:

"For routing, it is deemed that no extension to current mechanisms defined in [RFC7138] is needed.

The ODUCn link, which is the lowest layer of the ODU multiplexing hierarchy involving multiple ODU layers, is assumed to have been already configured when GMPLS is used to set up ODUk over ODUCn, therefore the resources that need to be advertised are the resources that are exposed by this ODUCn link and the ODUk multiplexing hierarchy on it. The 5Gbit/s OPUCn time slots do not need to be advertised, while the 1.25Gbit/s and 2.5Gbit/s OPUk time slots need to be advertised using the mechanisms already defined in [RFC7138].

Since there is a 1:1 correspondence between the ODUCn and the OTUCn signal, there is no need to explicitly define a new value to represent the ODUCn signal type in the OSPF-TE routing protocol."

Please note that this is not a change of content but simply the addition of 2-3 to explicity say that the advertisement of such TS is not needed and why.

Thank you

Daniele