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

Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Mon, 23 January 2023 21:30 UTC

Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 371A0C1516E1 for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Jan 2023 13:30:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.092
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.092 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=olddog.co.uk
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Nl46Qq4OU_Rt for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Jan 2023 13:30:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mta8.iomartmail.com (mta8.iomartmail.com [62.128.193.158]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3BF88C151555 for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 Jan 2023 13:30:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from vs3.iomartmail.com (vs3.iomartmail.com [10.12.10.124]) by mta8.iomartmail.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 30NLUSJu020850; Mon, 23 Jan 2023 21:30:28 GMT
Received: from vs3.iomartmail.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E6F14604B; Mon, 23 Jan 2023 21:30:28 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from vs3.iomartmail.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62B3E4604A; Mon, 23 Jan 2023 21:30:28 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (unknown [10.12.10.249]) by vs3.iomartmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Mon, 23 Jan 2023 21:30:28 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from LAPTOPK7AS653V ([148.252.129.45]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 30NLUQj9011900 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 23 Jan 2023 21:30:27 GMT
Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
From: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: 'Daniele Ceccarelli' <daniele.ietf@gmail.com>, 'CCAMP' <ccamp@ietf.org>
References: <CAB01kMgCUg6pRxR1F8FdTUFh=q0BGnYnGd8DuRY9cJUqiWy+iw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAB01kMgCUg6pRxR1F8FdTUFh=q0BGnYnGd8DuRY9cJUqiWy+iw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2023 21:30:26 -0000
Organization: Old Dog Consulting
Message-ID: <017401d92f71$e927cd50$bb7767f0$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0175_01D92F71.E927CD50"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Thread-Index: AQL7xIX9xg3qrujB5QXmnS/lqBSBa6xnWfzQ
Content-Language: en-gb
X-Originating-IP: 148.252.129.45
X-Thinkmail-Auth: adrian@olddog.co.uk
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=olddog.co.uk; h=reply-to :from:to:references:in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id :mime-version:content-type; s=20221128; bh=WNjhfuiVsNEJkmG0d9sbx rrO2yTIFt+bOsI6kN1ZE4Y=; b=SR36GtuVOOPq7y727diUBgBgl3kRVLYjFsQXI 5YGQMGtcOvsv3PhhaufRX2PV5CNLoUbLXVQ2GzuKclVznTq8QTvHvR2VhFOqHnqC OoqR1iTmStbDJzEVDhi0ykP/fDc+ht43jCdcvdIwJ2Jlr3SceGIUlJba0qGHf2fQ ICuFFnzE969qODMFje7c6IL0/DRXGEV7iZuOwhuzeJRyNKMB+RRS81V96nUK2CE9 ISmD1PbEuslVIpjvitIkRyJkKtivWG3BcxtP+T9xmvJ/QRpDa/R16O36Ba6uExaQ ECb5Hl+WSLvm1CRRX+xKFCnSVd3pJ9kn3upPZ13sZJofUaqqg==
X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSVA-9.1.0.2090-9.0.0.1002-27404.003
X-TM-AS-Result: No--19.561-10.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--19.561-10.0-31-10
X-TMASE-Version: IMSVA-9.1.0.2090-9.0.1002-27404.003
X-TMASE-Result: 10--19.560700-10.000000
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: Rp71wniPtoPxIbpQ8BhdbI61Z+HJnvsOcV3n4J/0zUO3Stk62MqiCICn q9qtGcvVnuC4VmJFPYaDUcmVABCbWl1kB4oQ4vIy0e7jfBjhB8dPnKxAOPp4WdgHOcgfoB8RG9k 6anidXWwfTarbNLChkpJqLk7k2JIebpOfTFQFY53TzWmGCXkX+ZQ7eT0DII9Ntnbn9SmDi/z3ZA kxxs9qMMOVCN6D0YHZOPlVzs0eCV+QuF+iBxEqry2LzK6SyftmD/tf6NhSJX4EpmTf3u8rpThbu aUQKXpsqJZOiAKoZrxVDBi5RcFJnH585nKQczq74t2mucDkRBGvPB/GOBV4LVkK6Aq+QtIFdvje m4DbmwBbk3W1BRG1Bb80sSLLn2/TWCiOH9oizEsBGmsibWGTbcGU90j67tDodDwP5ItpCOzesTw 6jtmPrkkk6yagWKEsoHx8+ay9lALUBpx0CmUvc1ICmG2RRehovO61PPXizymZwdqszN1DlMTr/G 24o7RrqjbqKM7gD/kF8O3PoMprwr134DSoRSP0bApbcE5szFOZEoWHC6Rh/eajpXRMTwmj+qwOb AztNgxU1xB5SaFW0yqFmu/h/tw7u4AM1i3aFvYvj6wHfIGxydVYleRFiu07myiLZetSf8mVHVxP 1hp9BUpZ1N/CwmPL0KkIUsNMdlTiRhduhvElsvJT+hf62k2YIbZSWXZZ520=
X-TMASE-SNAP-Result: 1.821001.0001-0-1-22:0,33:0,34:0-0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/aqkmddPU1adP3RXJ4c33zBGw_kU>
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] Update to draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-otn-b100g-applicability
X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 23 Jan 2023 21:30:39 -0000

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 <ccamp-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Daniele Ceccarelli
Sent: 23 January 2023 12:31
To: CCAMP <ccamp@ietf.org>
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