[Teas] Re: [CCAMP]Re: Missing switching-types for WSON and flexi-grid: WG LC comment for RFC 8776-bis or RFC 9093-bis

["Sergio Belotti (Nokia)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Julien, Italo

I had yesterday a short review of related RFCs , and I was convinced that WSON-LSC and flexi-grid-LSC representing both a superset of what LSC is.
From your explanation it seems exactly the opposite they are both sub-cases and in this case to represent inheritance as hierarchy in identity with LSC as base identity  makes sense.

Thanks
Sergio

From: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2024 5:40 PM
To: Italo Busi <Italo.Busi=[e-mail]>; Aihua Guo <[e-mail]>; Sergio Belotti (Nokia) <[e-mail]>
Cc: Daniele Ceccarelli (dceccare) <[e-mail]>; tom petch <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [Teas] Re: [CCAMP]Re: Missing switching-types for WSON and flexi-grid: WG LC comment for RFC 8776-bis or RFC 9093-bis

Ciao Italo,

I believe the hierarchy you depict is what inheritance is made for.

Short rationale: LSC is WDM at large, WSON-LSC is specialized for fixed-grid, Flexi-grid-LSC is specialized for flexi-grid.

Diving into our GMPLS documents:
- LSC was defined in RFC 3471: the label was only an unstructured 32-bit field and no LSC-specific info was specified for OSPF in RFC 4203;
- The WSON work specified some sub-TLVs for OSPF (RFC 7688) and pointed to RFC 6205 (entitled "Generalized Labels for LSC LSRs") as a label encoding (cf. RFC 7689);
- The flexi-grid work then specified the relevant extensions into the signaling (RFC 7792), including the label (RFC 7699 entitled "Generalized Labels for the Flexi-Grid in LSC LSRs") and flexi-specific info in OSPF (RFC 8363).
As a result, it seems to me that WSON and Flexi-grid were both progressed as specific sub-cases within the LSC familly, which can be reflected in YANG types.

Cheers,

Julien

On 19/11/2024 18:32:20 Italo Busi <Italo.Busi=[e-mail]><mailto:Italo.Busi=[e-mail]>, wrote:
Thanks Aihua for the suggestion

IMHO, if there is a hierarchical relationship between LSC and WSON-LSC/Flexi-Grid-LSC, it is a good idea to reflect it into YANG

However, since I was not an active IETF participants at the time these three LSCs (and the LSC in RFC 3471 in particular) have been defined, I am not sure that this hierarchical relationship exists or not

Can other experts in CCAMP/TEAS WGs confirm whether there is a hierarchical relationship between LSC and WSON-LSC/Flexi-Grid-LSC?

Thanks, Italo

From: Aihua Guo <[e-mail]><mailto:[e-mail]>
Sent: martedì 12 novembre 2024 16:50


+1 for RFC9093bis. Also, for WSON-LSC and flexi-grid LSC, the base identity should be LSC.

Aihua

On Tue, Nov 12, 2024 at 10:02 AM Sergio Belotti (Nokia) <sergio.belotti=[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
+1

Thanks
Sergio

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniele Ceccarelli (dceccare) <dceccare=[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2024 2:28 PM
>
>
> CAUTION: This is an external email. Please be very careful when clicking links or
> opening attachments. See the URL nok.it/ext<http://nok.it/ext> for additional information.
>
>
>
> +1
>
> Cheers
> Daniele
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tom petch <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
> Sent: Saturday, November 9, 2024 1:06 PM
> To: Italo Busi <Italo.Busi=[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>;
> [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
> Subject: [CCAMP]Re: Missing switching-types for WSON and flexi-grid: WG LC
> comment for RFC 8776-bis or RFC 9093-bis
>
> From: Italo Busi <Italo.Busi=[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
> Sent: 09 November 2024 11:18
>
> I have recently noted that there are no standardized YANG identities that could be
> used to represent the WSON-LSC, defined in RFC 7688, and flexi-grid LSC, defined
> in RFC 8363
>
> I am not sure whether these identities are better defined in TE Types (RFC 8776-
> bis) or Layer0 Types (RFC 9093-bis) YANG models but since both drafts are in WG
> LC we can fix in either was this gap
>
> My personal preference is to add them to RFC 9093-bis in order to avoid the need
> to update TE Types any time a new technology-specific switching type or LSP
> encoding type is defined
>
> What do you think?
>
> <tp>
> I agree
>
> Tom Petch
>
>
>
> Italo
>
>

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc

pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler

a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,

Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.



This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;

they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.

If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.

As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.

Thank you.