Re: [Pce] 答复: My Comment on draft-lee-pce-flexible-grid

[Leeyoung <[e-mail]>]

Hi Dieter,

I got it. We will clearly state what a frequency slot really means in the document.

Thanks
Young

From: Dieter Beller [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2017 12:23 PM
To: Leeyoung <[e-mail]>; Zhenghaomian <[e-mail]>; Julien Meuric <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [Pce] 答复: My Comment on draft-lee-pce-flexible-grid

Hi Young,
On 20.07.2017 11:41, Leeyoung wrote:
Hi Dieter,

I agree. In this draft, we refer to https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-flexible-grid-ospf-ext-09#section-4.1.1 for the available spectrum encoding. Is this what you are referring to, or more than that?

[DB>] no, I am exactly referring to draft-ietf-ccamp-flexible-grid-ospf-ext that is referenced in your pce draft.
[DB>] I just wanted to point out that you have to clearly define what a frequency slot is as it could be interpreted in
[DB>] different ways (see below).


Thanks,
Dieter




Thanks.
Young

From: Dieter Beller [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2017 11:35 AM
To: Zhenghaomian <[e-mail]><mailto:[e-mail]>; Leeyoung <[e-mail]><mailto:[e-mail]>; Julien Meuric <[e-mail]><mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [Pce] 答复: My Comment on draft-lee-pce-flexible-grid

Hi all,

the description of the available spectrum in draft-lee-pce-flexible-grid should in my opinion be consistent with the available spectrum
description in draft-ietf-ccamp-flexible-grid-ospf-ext. Please note that the available spectrum is advertised in terms of available central
frequencies!

A central frequency f_c is available only if the spectrum is available in the interval [f_c - f_minSlotWidth/2, fc + f_minSlotWidth/2]

If the flexgrid granularity is 6.25GHz and the minSlotWidth is 12.5GHz this means leads to: [f_c - 6.25GHz, f_c + 6.25 GHz]

This is different from advertising spectrum slots like for example [f_c_n-1, fc_n].

Please note that a modulated optical carrier occupies spectrum symmetrical around the central frequency.


Thanks,
Dieter


On 20.07.2017 11:04, Zhenghaomian wrote:

Hi, Julien and Young,



I fully agree on that we should try our best on reusing the existing object/TLVs. FYI, when we are working on GMPLS extensions from fixed-grid (WSON) to flexi-grid, we have some TLVs in parallel (switching types) for fixed/flexi-grid.



I assume this is exactly what we are doing in this draft, the split occurs when it is difficult to use existing TLV to represent the new features. In some cases, the meaning of flags/TLVs need to be changed to support different scenarios, so the similarity on object does not necessarily mean the equivalent on functionality.



My 2 cents,

Haomian



-----邮件原件-----

发件人: Pce [mailto:[e-mail]] 代表 Leeyoung

发送时间: 2017年7月20日 16:41

收件人: Julien Meuric; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>

主题: Re: [Pce] My Comment on draft-lee-pce-flexible-grid



Hi Julien,



I agree. A New flag on the object header (WA Object, I assume that is what you are pointing to) where we have a flag to indicate if this is fixed (WSON) or flexi-grid is reasonable instead of creating a new object for a new Spectrum Assignment Object.



TLVs require a bit different encoding due to the nature of additional parameters for flexi-grid. So strict re-use of WSON TLV may not be sufficient for some cases in flexi-grid.



Best regards,

Young



-----Original Message-----

From: Julien Meuric [mailto:[e-mail]]

Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2017 10:28 AM

To: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>

Subject: My Comment on draft-lee-pce-flexible-grid



Hi,



The discussion during the meeting suggests that I need to clarify my comment about draft-lee-pce-flexible-grid.



This I-D is very similar to draft-ietf-pce-wson-rwa-ext, which addresses the exact same problem over a slightly different WDM label space (running a side-by-side diff between them appears to be very practical).

This new I-D requests the creation of one object and 3 TLVs, which are identical to the ones created in the WSON.

As a result, I believe the latter should be reused as a starting popint.

Covering the flexi-grid case may just need to allocate new flag in the object header to identify the WDM type we're dealing with, and document the flexi-grid-specific assumptions (if any).



Thanks,



Julien



_______________________________________________

Pce mailing list

[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>

https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce

_______________________________________________

Pce mailing list

[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>

https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce