Re: [CCAMP] layer 0 type versioning

Leeyoung <> Thu, 09 May 2019 13:39 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 986EF120189 for <>; Thu, 9 May 2019 06:39:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HK_RANDOM_ENVFROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id df284K-IQDkT for <>; Thu, 9 May 2019 06:39:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 982311200DB for <>; Thu, 9 May 2019 06:39:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (unknown []) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id AF2164325FB69BD0D4AF; Thu, 9 May 2019 14:39:43 +0100 (IST)
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Thu, 9 May 2019 14:39:43 +0100
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 14.03.0439.000; Thu, 9 May 2019 06:39:35 -0700
From: Leeyoung <>
To: Daniele Ceccarelli <>, "CCAMP (" <>, Fatai Zhang <>
Thread-Topic: layer 0 type versioning
Thread-Index: AdUF48x2Wij6BRWCTXuzzIPERW/foAAgFLYgAAHYqvA=
Date: Thu, 9 May 2019 13:39:34 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E173D12ABB5sjceml521mbxchi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] layer 0 type versioning
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 May 2019 13:39:56 -0000

Hi Daniele,

Here we are talking about one single document for layer0-types to define all groupings and data types that are used by WSON and SSON and possibly used by any other layer0 related draft such as the upcoming optical impairment draft.


From: Daniele Ceccarelli []
Sent: Thursday, May 9, 2019 7:43 AM
To: Leeyoung <>;; CCAMP ( <>;; Fatai Zhang <>;
Subject: RE: layer 0 type versioning

Hi Young,

Ok, please do so.
Just one question (maybe we already discussed it but I don't that case apologies in advance): why one document for WSON topo and one for layer0-types? In TEAS there is a single document for TE types.


From: Leeyoung <<>>
Sent: den 8 maj 2019 23:37
To: CCAMP (<>) <<>>; Fatai Zhang <<>>; Daniele Ceccarelli <<>>
Subject: layer 0 type versioning

Hi WG,

In the Prague meeting, in regard to ietf-layer0-type, the conclusion was converged toward having a separate draft for keeping ietf-layer0-types file from WSON topology draft (similar to what te-types did for TE topology/tunnel). As Italo suggested, I think it is sound to create different versions of ietf-layer0-types while the current version can move with WSON and Flexi-grid drafts. If we need change/add new grouping/parameters in the future, we can create a new version of ietf-layer0-types (with a new date, e.g.,  ietf-layer0-types@2020-10-10) to differentiate from the last version. This way, we can manage different versions of types file and avoid drafts from getting stuck with MISSREF in the RFC Queue.

So the action is to separate ietf-layer0-types from the WSON topology draft into a separate draft with a proposed draft name:  draft-ietf-ccamp-layer0-types (once rectified by the chairs). I will publish soon the two drafts (one for WSON topo and another for layer0-types). Please let us know if you have any comment/concern on this action.

Young (on behalf of co-authors)