[CCAMP] RFC 7138 Example (Figure 7)

"Gruman, Fred" <fred.gruman@us.fujitsu.com> Mon, 24 March 2014 19:12 UTC

Return-Path: <fred.gruman@us.fujitsu.com>
X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C8E61A02B9 for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Mar 2014 12:12:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.91
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id p1gRITJ4FUMk for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Mar 2014 12:12:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fncnmp04.fnc.fujitsu.com (fncnmp04.fnc.fujitsu.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69F1B1A02A8 for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Mar 2014 12:12:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,722,1389765600"; d="scan'208";a="48930309"
Received: from rchexhcp2.fnc.net.local ([]) by fncnmp02.fnc.fujitsu.com with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 24 Mar 2014 14:12:53 -0500
Received: from RCHEXMBP2.fnc.net.local ([]) by RCHEXHCP2.fnc.net.local ([]) with mapi id 14.02.0347.000; Mon, 24 Mar 2014 14:12:53 -0500
From: "Gruman, Fred" <fred.gruman@us.fujitsu.com>
To: "daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com" <daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com>
Thread-Topic: RFC 7138 Example (Figure 7)
Thread-Index: AQHPP61GPlH4vYkTSUO40uzaWSDIHprwqKQA
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2014 19:12:52 +0000
Message-ID: <5DF87403A81B0C43AF3EB1626511B292D3D0EC00@RCHEXMBP2.fnc.net.local>
References: <20140314174503.5124B7FC179@rfc-editor.org>
In-Reply-To: <20140314174503.5124B7FC179@rfc-editor.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
x-tm-as-product-ver: SMEX-
x-tm-as-result: No--55.487100-0.000000-31
x-tm-as-user-approved-sender: Yes
x-tm-as-user-blocked-sender: No
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/rUjYk-bmdjTF4zyF_lA_UwBjgqc
Cc: "ccamp@ietf.org" <ccamp@ietf.org>
Subject: [CCAMP] RFC 7138 Example (Figure 7)
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, 24 Mar 2014 19:12:57 -0000

Hi Daniele,

I had a question about the example in Section 5, Figure 7.

Section 5 is a time series about advertisement on a OTU4 link.
 - t=0.  No LSP.  Figure 5.  OK.
 - t=T1.  ODU3 LSP added.  Figure 6.  OK.
 - t=T2.  ODU2 LSP added.  Figure 7.  <error?>

An ODU4 has 80 TS.  To multiplex an ODU3 requires 31 TS and an ODU2 requires 8 TS.  So at t=T2, I have an ODU3 and an ODU2 = 39TS total.  This leaves 41 TS remaining which is more than enough to carry an additional ODU3.

Thus, figure 7 should show priority 2-7 = 40 Gbps.

Is this correct?

(Maybe the example should have the second LSP rate=ODU3 instead of ODU2 and then Figure 7 would be correct).

Best Regards,

-----Original Message-----
From: CCAMP [mailto:ccamp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Sent: Friday, March 14, 2014 12:45 PM
To: ietf-announce@ietf.org; rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Cc: drafts-update-ref@iana.org; ccamp@ietf.org; rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Subject: [CCAMP] RFC 7138 on Traffic Engineering Extensions to OSPF for GMPLS Control of Evolving G.709 Optical Transport Networks

A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.

        RFC 7138

        Title:      Traffic Engineering Extensions to OSPF 
                    for GMPLS Control of Evolving G.709 
                    Optical Transport Networks 
        Author:     D. Ceccarelli, Ed.,
                    F. Zhang, S. Belotti,
                    R. Rao, J. Drake
        Status:     Standards Track
        Stream:     IETF
        Date:       March 2014
        Mailbox:    daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com, 
        Pages:      36
        Characters: 77038
        Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso:   None

        I-D Tag:    draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ospf-g709v3-13.txt

        URL:        http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7138.txt

This document describes Open Shortest Path First - Traffic Engineering (OSPF-TE) routing protocol extensions to support GMPLS control of Optical Transport Networks (OTNs) specified in ITU-T Recommendation G.709 as published in 2012.  It extends mechanisms defined in RFC 4203.

This document is a product of the Common Control and Measurement Plane Working Group of the IETF.

This is now a Proposed Standard.

STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community,and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.  Please refer to the current edition of the Internet Official Protocol Standards (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol.  Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

This announcement is sent to the IETF-Announce and rfc-dist lists.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, see

For searching the RFC series, see http://www.rfc-editor.org/search For downloading RFCs, see http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html

Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org.  Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution.

The RFC Editor Team
Association Management Solutions, LLC

CCAMP mailing list