Re: [Pce] Broadband Forum Liaison: Achieving Packet Network Optimization using DWDM Interfaces

Daniele Ceccarelli <daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com> Mon, 16 November 2015 14:11 UTC

Return-Path: <daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 808AD1B29D2; Mon, 16 Nov 2015 06:11:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.8
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 wAGDgEyL1Zgi; Mon, 16 Nov 2015 06:11:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sesbmg22.ericsson.net (sesbmg22.ericsson.net [193.180.251.48]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EF6581B2CB0; Mon, 16 Nov 2015 06:10:29 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb30-f79626d000006adf-ab-5649e3d33a5b
Received: from ESESSHC021.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.125]) by sesbmg22.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id FB.CA.27359.3D3E9465; Mon, 16 Nov 2015 15:10:27 +0100 (CET)
Received: from ESESSMB301.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.31]) by ESESSHC021.ericsson.se ([153.88.183.81]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Mon, 16 Nov 2015 15:10:27 +0100
From: Daniele Ceccarelli <daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com>
To: "michael.fargano@centurylink.com" <michael.fargano@centurylink.com>
Thread-Topic: Broadband Forum Liaison: Achieving Packet Network Optimization using DWDM Interfaces
Thread-Index: AdEINxc6TE4QHmqkTVCnnbAc6/cDZgYQMKqw
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2015 14:10:26 +0000
Message-ID: <4A1562797D64E44993C5CBF38CF1BE4812ADE468@ESESSMB301.ericsson.se>
References: <871EB8879748FA458598F0461906289322DA2077@eusaamb103.ericsson.se>
In-Reply-To: <871EB8879748FA458598F0461906289322DA2077@eusaamb103.ericsson.se>
Accept-Language: it-IT, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [153.88.183.20]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_4A1562797D64E44993C5CBF38CF1BE4812ADE468ESESSMB301erics_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA02SbUhTURjHOTv3btfV6racHrSklhIpmq4+HKKsPnmFjDCSMLCWu5VkKveq pRE5X3pZlpKazrTlHBoazUxDLQSXEUsqTS0dmL1YqalZKLp8Ia+3YN9+/J/fOc//wKGg0kJ6 UXEJySyXoI1XS+WE8fDChcDuL+FRwWOVO/HvT28hXnA2AjxU1kfgy3MmiLsN12T45YQD4tkp PYlzrwfg+Y4FCS5pGIf4StY4gV9MdJF4xPQN4MzBPhlutL6AeOzpDMQ5s00EvnvfCPGNrDfk nrXMSF4ZYKzX8gmm0eTLFM49JJnm0gEZk90+TjIWi1PCvM/slTGT9VlS5nl/OWSyv9mlzNU5 yOTMqA4oouU7dWx8XCrLbQ09Jj9VebVCmtTCn7s5005mgNdaA3CjEL0dPalrJUX2QJ0frFKB lXQ7QNXmUAOQL3ElQMV5dokBUJSU3oGGbPsEx50OQ9nWLkJwIF0kRyZHNRSctXQs+mo/L6A7 rUPD+h0ialBBJhZOErQfqp3+RQixgo5At+0B4tIINOD8BAV2o/ejzq7vy8UAvR7lPzEDgSHt iRxDJolYmEaWp2+gyCo08mXx30M2ot7iaonoJ6LqR3XLuYJeg+zGISIfqEpdrip10UpdNDEP Qn1FhVKRA1BVxQ8ociAqWbQRrvldIKsBKp7lj585qdEEsVxcLM8nJgQlsMn1YOnvtDXMBTeB ke97bYCmgHqlIng6LEpJalP5tDM2gCiodlcYOsKjlAqdNi2d5RKPcinxLG8D3hSh9lRkST4e UtIntcnsaZZNYrn/Uwnl5pUBrFulVwY9vU/c4vTBYXe2PWjbPFqQsnu0Kmbyc+6u1BDL3vSU Q7UxkaYSp/v1qfxceO/dz0hz/6bWs56B9Q26Rr/Vjmceeuf848pLFxz+K3oKO/5Mx/nW6oa5 moux/T6h0xpNWNsrVYy5pWfDOuixqq8nOknv01yee0Ru3FIL1x1UE/wpbYg/5HjtX32a2fI3 AwAA
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/IH9BbNW7TJsreiAH6lRXps0Ey2w>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 16 Nov 2015 06:12:10 -0800
Cc: "Matt Hartley, TEAS Secretary", "Gabrielle Bingham, Broadband Forum Secretariat" <gbingham@broadband-forum.org>, "IETF Statements, " <statements@ietf.org>, "CCAMP (ccamp@ietf.org)" <ccamp@ietf.org>, "Drew Rexrode II, BBF Routing and Transport Area Director" <charles.a.rexrode@verizon.com>, "TEAS WG (teas@ietf.org)" <teas@ietf.org>, "Dean Cheng, Packet Optical Evolution Project Stream Lead" <dean.cheng@huawei.com>, "pce@ietf.org" <pce@ietf.org>, David Sinicrope <david.sinicrope@ericsson.com>, "Robin Mersh, Broadband Forum CEO" <rmersh@broadband-forum.org>, "Alvaro Retana, Routing Area Director" <aretana@cisco.com>, "Vishnu Pavan Beeram, TEAS Co-Chair" <vbeeram@juniper.net>
Subject: Re: [Pce] Broadband Forum Liaison: Achieving Packet Network Optimization using DWDM Interfaces
X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Path Computation Element <pce.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pce>, <mailto:pce-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/pce/>
List-Post: <mailto:pce@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pce-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce>, <mailto:pce-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2015 14:11:08 -0000

Hello,



The TEAS, PCE and CCAMP Working Groups would like to thank the Broadband Forum for informing us of your effort on packet-optical networks, and providing the IETF with the opportunity to review and comment on your document and its use of our RFCs.



We have conducted an initial review where we noted the references to IETF RFCs on GMPLS and PCE for satisfying the control requirements.

Below is some preliminary feedback based on this initial review we hope you will find helpful and consider for the document.   However, given the recent IETF 94 meeting activity, we regret there was little time to conduct a thorough technical review of the document.  We understand the document is in the last call stage of development.   If time and the BBF process allows, the CCAMP, PCE and TEAS Working Groups would be happy to conduct a more in depth technical review over the coming weeks.  Please let us know if you wish us to proceed with such a review.



As the Broadband Forum progresses its work on "Achieving Packet Network Optimization using DWDM Interfaces", we would greatly appreciate if you keep us informed of any gaps you identify in the RFCs that are needed to satisfy these requirements.  Feedback from the BBF on existing and progressing CCAMP, PCE and TEAS work would be greatly appreciated and can be provided via the relevant IETF Working Group mailing list without the need for a formal liaison.



We look forward to your response and our continued communication on this important area of optical networking.

Best Regards,

Daniele Ceccarelli & Fatai Zhang - CCAMP Working Group Chairs

Jonathan Hardwick, Julien Meuric & Jean-Philippe Vasseur - PCE Working Group Chairs

Vishnu Pavan Beeram & Lou Berger - TEAS Working Group Chairs



---------------------------

Preliminary Feedback

---------------------------

Questions:

*             In A.2.1, how is the GMPLS communication between the Packet Node and the DWDM Network Element achieved?  Is there a specific control interface that is used in your solution? There are a number of possibilities for control channel connectivity available.   Perhaps clarifying which are intended would aid understanding and interoperability.

*             Are there more details on the management and SDN control aspects between the packet network and the optical network?  Additional management and SDN control detail might convey a better understanding of the solution configuration and its operation.



Comments:

*             When referring to PCE and related issues, e.g., in [R-26] and [R-27], it seems only stateless PCE (RFC4655) and corresponding PCEP (RFC5440) are included in the current solution.   The PCE Working Group is investigating stateful PCE and  PCE Initiated LSPs, which are planned to be published in the future.  It may be worth specifying which kind of PCE is suggested to be used in the current solution, to differentiate the two.  Has RFC 5623 - PCE-based inter-layer MPLS and GMPLS Traffic Engineering been considered?  It may be a good reference for this solution.

*             In section 4.4 when talking about SDN, Openflow is mentioned as a standard protocol to interact between packet nodes and DWDM nodes. PCE Protocol (PCEP) could be considered as another example, as it is currently used in IETF.  RFC 3413 about SNMP, and RFC 4208 about GMPLS UNI are also recommended references.

*             In section 4.5, [R-36] uses the term "North-Bound interface" to refer to the interface between Network Elements and the SDN controller.  We noted that some commonly use the same term when referring to the interface between the controller and what sits "above" the controller (e.g. another controller or orchestrator).  This could lead to unintended misunderstanding.  Perhaps a clarification would help avoid misunderstanding.


From: David Sinicrope
Sent: venerdì 16 ottobre 2015 19:22
To: Alia Atlas, Routing Area Director,; Deborah Brungard, Routing Area Director; Alvaro Retana, Routing Area Director; Daniele Ceccarelli; Fatai Zhang, CCAMP Co-Chair; Vishnu Pavan Beeram, TEAS Co-Chair; Lou Berger, TEAS Co-Chair; IETF Statements,
Cc: michael.fargano@centurylink.com; Robin Mersh, Broadband Forum CEO; Gabrielle Bingham, Broadband Forum Secretariat; David Sinicrope; Drew Rexrode II, BBF Routing and Transport Area Director; Oscar Gonzalez de Dios, CCAMP Secretary; Matt Hartley, TEAS Secretary; Dean Cheng, Packet Optical Evolution Project Stream Lead
Subject: Broadband Forum Liaison: Achieving Packet Network Optimization using DWDM Interfaces

Hi All,
Please find attached a liaison from the Broadband Forum and its associated attachments.
Please let me know if you have trouble receiving or opening the liaison.
Best Regards,
Dave Sinicrope
IETF-BBF Liaison Manager