[CCAMP] OSPF OTN considerations post IETF 82
Daniele Ceccarelli <daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com> Wed, 23 November 2011 18:18 UTC
Return-Path: <daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com>
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 448C021F8B3A for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Nov 2011 10:18:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.054
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.054 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.916, BAYES_00=-2.599, EXTRA_MPART_TYPE=1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MY_CID_AND_ARIAL2=1.46, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Tqk7-BUQmSbX for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Nov 2011 10:18:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailgw9.se.ericsson.net (mailgw9.se.ericsson.net [193.180.251.57]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A62FA21F8B38 for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Nov 2011 10:18:35 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb39-b7b3eae00000252a-5b-4ecd38f945fc
Received: from esessmw0197.eemea.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.125]) by mailgw9.se.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id C0.FE.09514.9F83DCE4; Wed, 23 Nov 2011 19:18:33 +0100 (CET)
Received: from ESESSCMS0360.eemea.ericsson.se ([169.254.2.32]) by esessmw0197.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.115.87]) with mapi; Wed, 23 Nov 2011 19:18:33 +0100
From: Daniele Ceccarelli <daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com>
To: CCAMP <ccamp@ietf.org>
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 19:18:31 +0100
Thread-Topic: OSPF OTN considerations post IETF 82
Thread-Index: AcypvXUM4uURSfqEQWyExafq21g2KwAAy7kQABLVdSA=
Message-ID: <B5630A95D803744A81C51AD4040A6DAA2293E672A9@ESESSCMS0360.eemea.ericsson.se>
Accept-Language: it-IT, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: it-IT, en-US
Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="_005_B5630A95D803744A81C51AD4040A6DAA2293E672A9ESESSCMS0360e_"; type="multipart/alternative"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA==
Subject: [CCAMP] OSPF OTN considerations post IETF 82
X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 18:18:37 -0000
Hi CCAMP, During the OTN OSPF draft presentation at the IETF meeting in Taipei two comments were raised with respect to the following issues: - Issue 1: Using different switching caps for each ODU type - Issue 2: Type 2 (unres bandwidth for variable containers) and Type 3 (MAX LSP bandwidth foe variable containers always used in tandem? WRT issue 1: the proposal was to indicate the bottom most ODUk of the muxing hiearachy in the Switching Capability field of the ISCD. After a quick talk with the other authors of the ID, the idea was to reject the proposal as it would lead to an overloading of the meaning of the Switching Capability field. (even if the definition of PSC1-2-3-4 already overloads the meaning of the switching capability field) WRT issue 2: it is analyzed in section 5.3 of the draft (version -00). I'm copying it below for your convenience In this example the advertisement of an ODUflex->ODU3 hierarchy is shown. In case of ODUflex advertisement the MAX LSP bandwidth needs to be advertised but in some cases also information about the Unreserved bandwidth could be useful. The amount of Unreserved bandwidth does not give a clear indication of how many ODUflex LSP can be set up either at the MAX LSP Bandwidth or at different rates, as it gives no information about the spatial allocation of the free TSs. An indication of the amount of Unreserved bandwidth could be useful during the path computation process, as shown in the following example. Supposing there are two TE-links (A and B) with MAX LSP Bandwidth equal to 10 Gbps each. In case 50Gbps of Unreserved Bandwidth are available on Link A, 10Gbps on Link B and 3 ODUflex LSPs of 10 GBps each, have to be restored, for sure only one can be restored along Link B and it is probable (but not sure) that two of them can be restored along Link A. Early proposal was to have, in the case of variable containers advertisements (i.e. ODUflex), the MAX LSP bandwidth TLV (Type 3) as a mandatory piece of information and the Unreserved bandiwdth TLV (Type 2) as an optional piece of information. The comment received is that optional information can lead to interworking issues and the counter proposal was to have both pieces of information as mandatory and, as a consequence, merge the two TLVs into a single one. We'd like to hear the opinion of the WG on both issues before proceeding with any modification to the document. Thanks, Daniele DANIELE CECCARELLI System & Technology - DU IP & Broadband Via L.Calda, 5 Genova, Italy Phone +390106002512 Mobile +393346725750 daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com www.ericsson.com [cid:image002.jpg@01CCA9C9.D9A14FD0]<http://www.ericsson.com/> This Communication is Confidential. We only send and receive email on the basis of the term set out at www.ericsson.com/email_disclaimer<http://www.ericsson.com/email_disclaimer>
- [CCAMP] OSPF OTN considerations post IETF 82 Daniele Ceccarelli
- Re: [CCAMP] OSPF OTN considerations post IETF 82 John E Drake
- Re: [CCAMP] OSPF OTN considerations post IETF 82 Ong, Lyndon
- Re: [CCAMP] OSPF OTN considerations post IETF 82 … John E Drake
- Re: [CCAMP] OSPF OTN considerations post IETF 82 … Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] OSPF OTN considerations post IETF 82 … John E Drake
- Re: [CCAMP] OSPF OTN considerations post IETF 82 … Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] OSPF OTN considerations post IETF 82 … Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] OSPF OTN considerations post IETF 82 … John E Drake
- Re: [CCAMP] OSPF OTN considerations post IETF 82 … Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] OSPF OTN considerations post IETF 82 … John E Drake
- Re: [CCAMP] OSPF OTN considerations post IETF 82 … Lou Berger
- [CCAMP] R: OSPF OTN considerations post IETF 82 (… BELOTTI, SERGIO (SERGIO)
- Re: [CCAMP] R: OSPF OTN considerations post IETF … Zhangfatai
- Re: [CCAMP] OSPF OTN considerations post IETF 82 … Julien Meuric
- Re: [CCAMP] R: OSPF OTN considerations post IETF … Julien Meuric
- [CCAMP] 答复: R: OSPF OTN considerations post IETF … Zhangfatai
- [CCAMP] 答复: OSPF OTN considerations post IETF 82 … Zhangfatai
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: OSPF OTN considerations post IETF… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: OSPF OTN considerations post IETF… Ong, Lyndon
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: OSPF OTN considerations post IETF… John E Drake
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: OSPF OTN considerations post IETF… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: OSPF OTN considerations post IETF… John E Drake
- [CCAMP] 答复: 答复: OSPF OTN considerations post IETF… Zhangfatai
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: OSPF OTN considerations post IETF… Daniele Ceccarelli
- [CCAMP] R: 答复: OSPF OTN considerations post IETF … BELOTTI, SERGIO (SERGIO)
- Re: [CCAMP] OSPF OTN considerations post IETF 82 … Kireeti Kompella
- Re: [CCAMP] R: 答复: OSPF OTN considerations post I… Ong, Lyndon
- Re: [CCAMP] R: 答复: OSPF OTN considerations post I… Varma, Eve L (Eve)
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: OSPF OTN considerations post IETF… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: 答复: OSPF OTN considerations post … Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: OSPF OTN considerations post IETF… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] R: 答复: OSPF OTN considerations post I… Rajan Rao
- Re: [CCAMP] OSPF OTN considerations post IETF 82 … neil.2.harrison
- Re: [CCAMP] OSPF OTN considerations post IETF 82 … Julien Meuric
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: R: OSPF OTN considerations post I… Julien Meuric
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: R: OSPF OTN considerations post I… John E Drake
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: R: OSPF OTN considerations post I… John E Drake
- [CCAMP] R: 答复: R: OSPF OTN considerations post IE… BELOTTI, SERGIO (SERGIO)
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: R: OSPF OTN considerations post I… John E Drake
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: R: OSPF OTN considerations post I… Sadler, Jonathan B.
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: R: OSPF OTN considerations post I… Igor Bryskin
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: R: OSPF OTN considerations post I… John E Drake
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: R: OSPF OTN considerations post I… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: R: OSPF OTN considerations post I… Julien Meuric
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: R: OSPF OTN considerations post I… John E Drake
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: R: OSPF OTN considerations post I… John E Drake
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: R: OSPF OTN considerations post I… John E Drake
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: R: OSPF OTN considerations post I… John E Drake
- [CCAMP] R: 答复: R: OSPF OTN considerations post IE… BELOTTI, SERGIO (SERGIO)
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: R: OSPF OTN considerations post I… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: R: OSPF OTN considerations post I… John E Drake
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: R: OSPF OTN considerations post I… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: R: OSPF OTN considerations post I… John E Drake
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: R: OSPF OTN considerations post I… John E Drake
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: R: OSPF OTN considerations post I… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: R: OSPF OTN considerations post I… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: R: OSPF OTN considerations post I… John E Drake
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: R: OSPF OTN considerations post I… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: R: OSPF OTN considerations post I… John E Drake
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: R: OSPF OTN considerations post I… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: R: OSPF OTN considerations post I… John E Drake
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: R: OSPF OTN considerations post I… John E Drake
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: R: OSPF OTN considerations post I… Sadler, Jonathan B.
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: R: OSPF OTN considerations post I… John E Drake
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: R: OSPF OTN considerations post I… Daniele Ceccarelli
- Re: [CCAMP] 答复: R: OSPF OTN considerations post I… John E Drake