Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid in LSC Label Switching Routers
"Zafar Ali (zali)" <zali@cisco.com> Mon, 03 February 2014 07:59 UTC
Return-Path: <zali@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1EFA1A0079 for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 2 Feb 2014 23:59:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.736
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.736 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.535, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QppVB535RLXd for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 2 Feb 2014 23:59:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-5.cisco.com (alln-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.142.92]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C7FE1A006B for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Sun, 2 Feb 2014 23:59:51 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=8664; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1391414387; x=1392623987; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to: content-id:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=EYKjD1pqDXE2A58Ou3kJgTeoyVLoUOuw07MjYt1edl8=; b=GY1/e98z0QJXn4dzSlWWOI9DRrtt9TEy0YuMPq7vu2i2AjmsYpl8Nx6e kaAdmLiGtw9ruK1txfxE5I7/5xxmxCWKPMn9tvR9bj03yhByvu2pK2U+e Q17rrdqWgeMONMnTB87Wlo1iC493sINlFLg2WFdGwu6Tw/afjLqESZKLG A=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AicFAMdL71KtJV2b/2dsb2JhbABZgww4V4MBuxUYaxZ0giUBAQEEAQEBIAQNOgsMBgEIDgMDAQEBAQICERIDAgQlCxQBCAgCBAENBRuHag2rY6EaF4EpjH4KBwEdCBAbBwQCBIJlgUkEmCqBMpBvgW+BPoFoCRci
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.95,771,1384300800"; d="scan'208";a="17468656"
Received: from rcdn-core-4.cisco.com ([173.37.93.155]) by alln-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 03 Feb 2014 07:59:46 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x01.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x01.cisco.com [173.37.183.75]) by rcdn-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s137xkc3015078 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Mon, 3 Feb 2014 07:59:46 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x14.cisco.com ([169.254.4.71]) by xhc-rcd-x01.cisco.com ([173.37.183.75]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Mon, 3 Feb 2014 01:59:46 -0600
From: "Zafar Ali (zali)" <zali@cisco.com>
To: Iftekhar Hussain <IHussain@infinera.com>, Daniele Ceccarelli <daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com>, Oscar González de Dios <ogondio@tid.es>, "Giovanni Martinelli (giomarti)" <giomarti@cisco.com>, Ramon Casellas <ramon.casellas@cttc.es>
Thread-Topic: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid in LSC Label Switching Routers
Thread-Index: AQHPHo1BydwR2IGn0keMwppSynySeZqfWVOAgAAFhICAAAU/AIAAAKAAgAQPSgD//8wDgA==
Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2014 07:59:45 +0000
Message-ID: <CF14B62B.9456B%zali@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <D7D7AB44C06A2440B716F1F1F5E70AE53FB0FC88@SV-EXDB-PROD2.infinera.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.3.120616
x-originating-ip: [10.86.240.132]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <4D655D13D20F5C418013EAD87DED4A15@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: CCAMP <ccamp@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid in LSC Label Switching Routers
X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group <ccamp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ccamp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ccamp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2014 07:59:54 -0000
Hi: I agree and don't see any strong reason for why CCAMP should not go with m=16. However, at the moment we can say that usage of only x number of bits is define (to match current DP definition in ITU-T). Thanks Regards … Zafar -----Original Message----- From: "Iftekhar com>" <IHussain@infinera.com> Date: Monday, February 3, 2014 1:07 AM To: Daniele Ceccarelli <daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com>, Oscar de Dios <ogondio@tid.es>, "Giovanni Martinelli (giomarti)" <giomarti@cisco.com>, "ramon.casellas@cttc.es" <ramon.casellas@cttc.es> Cc: "ccamp@ietf.org" <ccamp@ietf.org> Subject: Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid in LSC Label Switching Routers >This is a very interesting discussion. I believe extending the value of >m to 16-bit makes sense. BTW, that is why in our label definition we had >proposed a 16-bit for the m to begin with. > >Regarding "why not", all along there has been recurring theme of not >getting ahead of ITU definitions. So I am afraid, we can be selective. >Having said this, if the collective wisdom is to go ahead - that is fine >with me. But then let us look at all aspects and solutions (routing, >signaling, etc.). > >Regarding the "entire spectrum slot is feasible", I agree. So let us >first start with discussing/capturing this requirement/use case in the >framework document? > >Best regards, >Iftekhar >-----Original Message----- >From: Daniele Ceccarelli [mailto:daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com] >Sent: Friday, January 31, 2014 8:08 AM >To: Oscar González de Dios; Giovanni Martinelli (giomarti); Ramon Casellas >Cc: CCAMP >Subject: Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid in LSC Label >Switching Routers > >>> My thoughts, exactly, although no strong opinion. I guess the other >>>question would be "why not"? > >+1 > >We still have 16 bits reserved... > >BR >Daniele > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: CCAMP [mailto:ccamp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Oscar >> González de Dios >> Sent: venerdì 31 gennaio 2014 17:06 >> To: Giovanni Martinelli (giomarti); Ramon Casellas >> Cc: CCAMP >> Subject: Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid in LSC >> Label Switching Routers >> >> Hi, my 2 cents... >> >> With the encoding, you should be able to describe a frequency slot >> as big as the whole spectrum available in the band. If 8 bits (that >> give a width of >> 1593,75 GHz using the granularity of 6,25) is not enough, then it MUST >> be extended to a bigger value. The flexi-grid framework allows a >> hierarchy of frequency slots, so the ³entire spectrum² slot is >> feasible and in line with current ITU recommendations. We are not >> saying a single signal uses that amount of spectrum. >> >> >> Oscar >> >> >> El 31/01/14 16:47, "Giovanni Martinelli (giomarti)" >> <giomarti@cisco.com> >> escribió: >> >> > >> >On 31 Jan 2014, at 16:27, Ramon Casellas <ramon.casellas@cttc.es> >>wrote: >> > >> >> El 31/01/2014 15:03, Loa Andersson escribió: >> >>> Adrian, >> >>> >> >>> I do not have any problem with that, unless there is a intended >> >>> use of the reserved field. >> >>> >> >> Loa, Adrian, all, >> >> >> >> My thoughts, exactly, although no strong opinion. I guess the other >> >>question would be "why not"? >> >> If, as Adrian mentions, we constrain the its use as defined in >> >>G.694.1 while leaving room for growth, at least the encoding would >> >>be more likely be reused (as opposed to the WSON -> SSON). >> >> >> > >> >GM> is not mere reuse but future protocol compatibility. Sounds to >> >GM> me >> >that¹s better to allocate few more bits know than looking for them in >> >the future. Btw, to answer Loa doubts, there¹s no idea about how >> >using reserved bits right now. >> > >> >Cheers >> >G >> > >> > >> >> For what is worth, individual drafts that are considering extending >> >>RSVP-TE for signaling media channels would also be affected. The >> >>underlying idea is to propose new types for the sender template and >> >>the flowspec in the flow descriptor to accommodate for the requested >> >>and allocated slot width. Right now, only the "m" parameter is >> >>encoded with the corresponding padding/reserved bytes. >> >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Ramon >> >> >> >> PS: much like Adrian's draft, the label encoding proposed in >> >>http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-li-ccamp-flexible-grid-label-00 >> >>also took into account the fact that a reduced number of bits would >> >>suffice to cover G.694.1 >> >> >> >>> On 2014-01-31 19:44, Adrian Farrel wrote: >> >>>> Hi Gabriele, >> >>>> >> >>>> IIRC this topic has come up in various discussions. >> >>>> I think the discussion ran aground when we tried to understand >> >>>>what ITU-T SG15 >> >>>> Q6 data plane capabilities this increased value of "m" modelled. >> >>>> >> >>>> I believe that we could easily increase the size of the m field, >> >>>>but as I understand the status of the Q6 work, we would still >> >>>>need to constrain its use as defined in G.694.1. Maybe that is >> >>>>the best >> >>>>compromise: it gives us scope for future expansion, but it makes >> >>>>(for now) the value strictly limited according to the current >> >>>>definition of the data plane we are controlling. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> CCAMP mailing list >> >> CCAMP@ietf.org >> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp >> > >> >_______________________________________________ >> >CCAMP mailing list >> >CCAMP@ietf.org >> >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp >> >> >> ________________________________ >> >> Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede >> consultar nuestra política de envío y recepción de correo electrónico >> en el enlace situado más abajo. >> This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send >> and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at: >> http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx >> _______________________________________________ >> CCAMP mailing list >> CCAMP@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp > >_______________________________________________ >CCAMP mailing list >CCAMP@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Ramon Casellas
- [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid in … Daniel King
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Iftekhar Hussain
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Gabriele Maria Galimberti (ggalimbe)
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Loa Andersson
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Gabriele Maria Galimberti (ggalimbe)
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Giovanni Martinelli (giomarti)
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Giovanni Martinelli (giomarti)
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Oscar González de Dios
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Daniele Ceccarelli
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Curtis Villamizar
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Iftekhar Hussain
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Loa Andersson
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Iftekhar Hussain
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Zafar Ali (zali)
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Loa Andersson
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Huub van Helvoort
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Zafar Ali (zali)
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Ramon Casellas
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Zafar Ali (zali)
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Gabriele Maria Galimberti (ggalimbe)
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Huub van Helvoort
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Gabriele Maria Galimberti (ggalimbe)
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Gabriele Maria Galimberti (ggalimbe)
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Loa Andersson
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Jonas Mårtensson
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Giovanni Martinelli (giomarti)
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Ramon Casellas
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Huub van Helvoort
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Jonas Mårtensson
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Gabriele Maria Galimberti (ggalimbe)
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Zhangxian (Xian)
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Iftekhar Hussain
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Iftekhar Hussain
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Zhangxian (Xian)
- [CCAMP] Flexi-Grid control plane requirements - w… Ramon Casellas
- Re: [CCAMP] Flexi-Grid control plane requirements… Oscar González de Dios
- Re: [CCAMP] Flexi-Grid control plane requirements… Iftekhar Hussain
- Re: [CCAMP] Flexi-Grid control plane requirements… Zhangxian (Xian)
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Giovanni Martinelli (giomarti)
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [CCAMP] Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid… Giovanni Martinelli (giomarti)