[Docs] [txt|pdf] [Tracker] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: 00 01 02 03 04 05 06

Internet Engineering Task Force                      D. Hiremagalur, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                           G. Grammel, Ed.
Intended status: Standards Track                                 Juniper
Expires: September 2, 2018                            G. Galimberti, Ed.
                                                                   Cisco
                                                                R. Kunze
                                                        Deutsche Telekom
                                                               D. Beller
                                                                   Nokia
                                                           March 1, 2018


Extension to the Link Management Protocol (LMP/DWDM -rfc4209) for Dense
 Wavelength Division Multiplexing (DWDM) Optical Line Systems to manage
the application code of optical interface parameters in DWDM application
                 draft-dharinigert-ccamp-dwdm-if-lmp-06

Abstract

   This memo defines extensions to LMP(rfc4209) for managing Optical
   parameters associated with Wavelength Division Multiplexing (WDM)
   systems in accordance with the Interface Application Identifier
   approach defined in ITU-T Recommendation G.694.1.[ITU.G694.1] and its
   extensions.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on September 2, 2018.





Hiremagalur, et al.     Expires September 2, 2018               [Page 1]


Internet-Draft   draft-dharinigert-ccamp-dwdm-if-lmp-06       March 2018


Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  DWDM line system  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  Extensions to LMP-WDM Protocol  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   5.  General Parameters - OCh_General  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   6.  ApplicationIdentifier - OCh_ApplicationIdentifier . . . . . .   6
   7.  OCh_Ss - OCh transmit parameters  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   8.  OCh_Rs - receive parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   9.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   11. Contributors  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   12. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     12.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     12.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13

1.  Introduction

   This extension addresses the use cases described by "draft-ietf-
   ccamp-dwdm-if-mng-ctrl-fwk".  LMP [RFC4902] provides link property
   correlation capabilities that can be used between a transceiver
   device and an Optical Line System (OLS) device.  Link property
   correlation is a procedure by which, intrinsic parameters and
   capabilities are exchanged between two ends of a link.  Link property
   correlation as defined in RFC3591 allows either end of the link to
   supervise the received signal and operate within a commonly
   understood parameter window.  Here the term 'link' refers in
   particular to the attachment link between OXC and OLS (see Figure 1).
   The relevant interface parameters are in line with "draft-dharini-
   ccamp-dwdm-if-yang".




Hiremagalur, et al.     Expires September 2, 2018               [Page 2]


Internet-Draft   draft-dharinigert-ccamp-dwdm-if-lmp-06       March 2018


2.  DWDM line system

   Figure 1 shows a set of reference points (Rs and Ss), for a single-
   channel connection between transmitter (Tx) and receiver (Rx)
   devices.  Here the DWDM network elements in between those devices
   include an Optical Multiplexer (OM) and an Optical Demultiplexer
   (OD).  In addition it may include one or more Optical Amplifiers (OA)
   and one or more Optical Add-Drop Multiplexers (OADM).


          +-------------------------------------------------+
       Ss |              DWDM Network Elements              | Rs
   +--+ | |  | \                                       / |  |  | +--+
   Tx L1--|->|   \    +------+            +------+   /   |--|-->Rx L1
   +---+  |  |    |   |      |  +------+  |      |  |    |  |    +--+
   +---+  |  |    |   |      |  |      |  |      |  |    |  |    +--+
   Tx L2--|->| OM |-->|------|->|ROADM |--|------|->| OD |--|-->Rx L2
   +---+  |  |    |   |      |  |      |  |      |  |    |  |    +--+
   +---+  |  |    |   |      |  +------+  |      |  |    |  |    +--+
   Tx L3--|->|   /    | DWDM |    |  ^    | DWDM |   \   |--|-->Rx L3
   +---+  |  | /      | Link +----|--|----+ Link |     \ |  |    +--+
          +-----------+           |  |           +----------+
                               +--+  +--+
                               |        |
                            Rs v        | Ss
                            +-----+  +-----+
                            |RxLx |  |TxLx |
                            +-----+  +-----+

   Ss = Sender reference point at the DWDM network element
        tributary output
   Rs = Receiver reference point at the DWDM network element
        tributary input
   Lx = Lambda x
   OM = Optical Mux
   OD = Optical Demux
   ROADM = Reconfigurable Optical Add Drop Mux


   from Fig. 5.1/G.698.2

                 Figure 1: Linear Single Channel approach









Hiremagalur, et al.     Expires September 2, 2018               [Page 3]


Internet-Draft   draft-dharinigert-ccamp-dwdm-if-lmp-06       March 2018


   Figure 2 Extended LMP Model ( from [RFC4209] )


            +------+ Ss    +------+       +------+    Rs +------+
            |      | ----- |      |       |      | ----- |      |
            | OXC1 | ----- | OLS1 | ===== | OLS2 | ----- | OXC2 |
            |      | ----- |      |       |      | ----- |      |
            +------+       +------+       +------+       +------+
              ^  ^             ^              ^             ^  ^
              |  |             |              |             |  |
              |  +-----LMP-----+              +-----LMP-----+  |
              |                                                |
              +----------------------LMP-----------------------+

   OXC        : is an entity that contains transponders
   OLS        : generic optical system, it can be -
                Optical Mux, Optical Demux, Optical Add
                Drop Mux, Amplifier etc.
   OLS to OLS : represents the Optical Multiplex section
                <xref target="ITU.G709"/>
   Rs/Ss      : reference points in between the OXC and the OLS



                       Figure 2: Extended LMP Model

3.  Use Cases

   The use cases are described in draft-ietf-ccamp-dwdm-if-mng-ctrl-fwk

4.  Extensions to LMP-WDM Protocol

   This document defines extensions to [RFC4209] to allow a set of
   characteristic parameters, to be exchanged between a router or
   optical switch (e.g.  OTN cross connect) and the optical line system
   to which it is attached.  In particular, this document defines
   additional Data Link sub-objects to be carried in the LinkSummary
   message defined in [RFC4204] and [RFC6205].  The OXC and OLS systems
   may be managed by different Network management systems and hence may
   not know the capability and status of their peer.  These messages and
   their usage are defined in subsequent sections of this document.










Hiremagalur, et al.     Expires September 2, 2018               [Page 4]


Internet-Draft   draft-dharinigert-ccamp-dwdm-if-lmp-06       March 2018


     The following new messages are defined for the WDM extension for
     ITU-T G.698.2 [ITU.G698.2]/ITU-T G.698.1 [ITU.G698.1]/
     ITU-T G.959.1 [ITU.G959.1]
       - OCh_General                 (sub-object Type = TBA)
       - OCh_ApplicationIdentier     (sub-object Type = TBA)
       - OCh_Ss                      (sub-object Type = TBA)
       - OCh_Rs                      (sub-object Type = TBA)

5.  General Parameters - OCh_General

   These are a set of general parameters as described in [G698.2] and
   [G.694.1].  Please refer to the "draft-galikunze-ccamp-dwdm-if-snmp-
   mib" and "draft-dharini-ccamp-dwdm-if-yang" for more details about
   these parameters and the [RFC6205] for the wavelength definition.

    The general parameters are
     1. Central Frequency - (Tera Hz) 4 bytes (see RFC6205 sec.3.2)
     2. Number of Application Identifiers (A.I.) Supported
     3. Single-channel Application Identifier in use
     4. Application Identifier Type in use
     5. Application Identifier in use

   Figure 3: The format of the this sub-object (Type = TBA, Length =
   TBA) is as follows:

     0                   1                   2                   3
     0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |    Type       |    Length     |         (Reserved)            |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                     Central Frequency                         |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |   Number of Application                 |                     |
    |   Identifiers Supported                 |     (Reserved)      |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    | Single-channel|  A.I. Type    |         A.I. length           |
    | Application   |   in use      |                               |
    | Identifier    |               |                               |
    | Number in use |               |                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |           Single-channel Application Identifier in use        |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |           Single-channel Application Identifier in use        |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |           Single-channel Application Identifier in use        |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+





Hiremagalur, et al.     Expires September 2, 2018               [Page 5]


Internet-Draft   draft-dharinigert-ccamp-dwdm-if-lmp-06       March 2018


      A.I. Type in use: STANDARD, PROPRIETARY

         A.I. Type in use: STANDARD

         Refer to G.698.2 recommendation :  B-DScW-ytz(v)

     0                   1                   2                   3
     0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                Single-channel Application Code                |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                Single-channel Application Code                |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                Single-channel Application Code                |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


         A.I. Type in use: PROPRIETARY

      Note: if the A.I. type = PROPRIETARY, the first 6 Octets of the
      Application Identifier in use are six characters of the
      PrintableString must contain the Hexadecimal representation of
      an OUI (Organizationally Unique Identifier) assigned to the
      vendor whose implementation generated the Application
      Identifier; the remaining octets of the PrintableString are
      unspecified.

     0                   1                   2                   3
     0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                        OUI                                    |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |              OUI cont.        |           Vendor value        |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                           Vendor Value                        |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


                           Figure 3: OCh_General

6.  ApplicationIdentifier - OCh_ApplicationIdentifier

   This message is to exchange the application identifiers supported as
   described in [G698.2].  There can be more than one Application
   Identifier supported by the transmitter/receiver in the OXC.  The
   number of application identifiers supported is exchanged in the
   "OCh_General" message.  (from [G698.1]/[G698.2]/[G959.1] and G.874.1
   )



Hiremagalur, et al.     Expires September 2, 2018               [Page 6]


Internet-Draft   draft-dharinigert-ccamp-dwdm-if-lmp-06       March 2018


    The parameters are
        1. Number of Application Identifiers (A.I.) Supported

        2. Single-channel application identifier Number
           uniquely identifiers this entry - 8 bits

        3. Application Indentifier Type (A.I.) (STANDARD/PROPRIETARY)

        4. Single-channel application identifier -- 96 bits
           (from [G698.1]/[G698.2]/[G959.1]


      - this parameter can have
           multiple instances as the transceiver can support multiple
           application identifiers.



   Figure 4: The format of the this sub-object (Type = TBA, Length =
   TBA) is as follows:

     0                   1                   2                   3
     0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |    Type       |    Length     |         (Reserved)            |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |   Number of Application                 |                     |
    |   Identifiers Supported                 |     (Reserved)      |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    | Single-channel|  A.I. Type    |         A.I. length           |
    | Application   |               |                               |
    | Identifier    |               |                               |
    | Number        |               |                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |               Single-channel Application Identifier           |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |               Single-channel Application Identifier           |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |               Single-channel Application Identifier           |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    //              ....                                           //
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    | Single-channel|               |         A.I. length           |
    | Application   |   A.I. Type   |                               |
    | Identifier    |               |                               |
    | Number        |               |                               |
    |               |               |                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+



Hiremagalur, et al.     Expires September 2, 2018               [Page 7]


Internet-Draft   draft-dharinigert-ccamp-dwdm-if-lmp-06       March 2018


    |               Single-channel Application Identifier           |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |               Single-channel Application Identifier           |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |               Single-channel Application Identifier           |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


      A.I. Type in use: STANDARD, PROPRIETARY

       A.I. Type in use: STANDARD
       Refer to G.698.2 recommendation :  B-DScW-ytz(v)

     0                   1                   2                   3
     0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                Single-channel Application Code                |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                Single-channel Application Code                |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                Single-channel Application Code                |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


         A.I. Type in use: PROPRIETARY

      Note: if the A.I. type = PROPRIETARY, the first 6 Octets of the
      Application Identifier in use are six characters of the
      PrintableString must contain the Hexadecimal representation of
      an OUI (Organizationally Unique Identifier) assigned to the
      vendor whose implementation generated the Application
      Identifier; the remaining octets of the PrintableString are
      unspecified.

     0                   1                   2                   3
     0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                        OUI                                    |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |              OUI cont.        |           Vendor value        |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                           Vendor Value                        |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                    Figure 4: OCh_ApplicationIdentifier






Hiremagalur, et al.     Expires September 2, 2018               [Page 8]


Internet-Draft   draft-dharinigert-ccamp-dwdm-if-lmp-06       March 2018


7.  OCh_Ss - OCh transmit parameters

   These are the G.698.2 parameters at the Source(Ss reference points).
   Please refer to "draft-dharini-ccamp-dwdm-if-yang" for more details
   about these parameters.

       1. Output power



   Figure 5: The format of the OCh sub-object (Type = TBA, Length = TBA)
   is as follows:


     0                   1                   2                  3
     0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |    Type       |    Length     |         (Reserved)            |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                      Output Power                             |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


                   Figure 5: OCh_Ss transmit parameters

8.  OCh_Rs - receive parameters

   These are the G.698.2 parameters at the Sink (Rs reference points).

       1.  Current Input Power      - (0.1dbm) 4bytes





















Hiremagalur, et al.     Expires September 2, 2018               [Page 9]


Internet-Draft   draft-dharinigert-ccamp-dwdm-if-lmp-06       March 2018


   Figure 6: The format of the OCh receive sub-object (Type = TBA,
   Length = TBA) is as follows:

     The format of the OCh receive/OLS Sink sub-object (Type = TBA,
     Length = TBA) is as follows:

     0                   1                   2                   3
     0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |    Type       |    Length     |                   (Reserved)  |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                   Current Input Power                         |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+



                    Figure 6: OCh_Rs receive parameters

9.  Security Considerations

   LMP message security uses IPsec, as described in [RFC4204].  This
   document only defines new LMP objects that are carried in existing
   LMP messages, similar to the LMP objects in [RFC:4209].  This
   document does not introduce new security considerations.

10.  IANA Considerations

      LMP <xref target="RFC4204"/> defines the following name spaces and
      the ways in which IANA can make assignments to these namespaces:

    -  LMP Message Type
    -  LMP Object Class
    -  LMP Object Class type (C-Type) unique within the Object Class
    -  LMP Sub-object Class type (Type) unique within the Object Class
     This memo introduces the following new assignments:

      LMP Sub-Object Class names:

    under DATA_LINK Class name (as defined in <xref target="RFC4204"/>)
      - OCh_General                  (sub-object Type = TBA)
      - OCh_ApplicationIdentifier    (sub-object Type = TBA)
      - OCh_Ss                       (sub-object Type = TBA)
      - OCh_Rs                       (sub-object Type = TBA)








Hiremagalur, et al.     Expires September 2, 2018              [Page 10]


Internet-Draft   draft-dharinigert-ccamp-dwdm-if-lmp-06       March 2018


11.  Contributors

               Arnold Mattheus
                 Deutsche Telekom
                 Darmstadt
                 Germany
                 email a.mattheus@telekom.de

               John E. Drake
                 Juniper
                 1194 N Mathilda Avenue
                 HW-US,Pennsylvania
                 USA
                 jdrake@juniper.net

               Zafar Ali
                 Cisco
                 3000 Innovation Drive
                 KANATA
                 ONTARIO K2K 3E8
                 zali@cisco.com


12.  References

12.1.  Normative References

   [I-D.ietf-ccamp-dwdm-if-mng-ctrl-fwk]
              Kunze, R., Grammel, G., Beller, D., Galimberti, G., and J.
              Meuric, "A framework for Management and Control of DWDM
              optical interface parameters", draft-ietf-ccamp-dwdm-if-
              mng-ctrl-fwk-07 (work in progress), September 2017.

   [ITU.G694.1]
              International Telecommunications Union, ""Spectral grids
              for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid"",
              ITU-T Recommendation G.698.2, February 2012.

   [ITU.G698.2]
              International Telecommunications Union, "Amplified
              multichannel dense wavelength division multiplexing
              applications with single channel optical interfaces",
              ITU-T Recommendation G.698.2, November 2009.

   [ITU.G709]
              International Telecommunications Union, "Interface for the
              Optical Transport Network (OTN)", ITU-T Recommendation
              G.709, February 2012.



Hiremagalur, et al.     Expires September 2, 2018              [Page 11]


Internet-Draft   draft-dharinigert-ccamp-dwdm-if-lmp-06       March 2018


   [ITU.G872]
              International Telecommunications Union, "Architecture of
              optical transport networks", ITU-T Recommendation G.872,
              October 2012.

   [ITU.G874.1]
              International Telecommunications Union, "Optical transport
              network (OTN): Protocol-neutral management information
              model for the network element view", ITU-T Recommendation
              G.874.1, October 2012.

   [RFC4054]  Strand, J., Ed. and A. Chiu, Ed., "Impairments and Other
              Constraints on Optical Layer Routing", RFC 4054,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC4054, May 2005,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4054>.

   [RFC4204]  Lang, J., Ed., "Link Management Protocol (LMP)", RFC 4204,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC4204, October 2005,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4204>.

   [RFC4209]  Fredette, A., Ed. and J. Lang, Ed., "Link Management
              Protocol (LMP) for Dense Wavelength Division Multiplexing
              (DWDM) Optical Line Systems", RFC 4209,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC4209, October 2005,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4209>.

   [RFC6205]  Otani, T., Ed. and D. Li, Ed., "Generalized Labels for
              Lambda-Switch-Capable (LSC) Label Switching Routers",
              RFC 6205, DOI 10.17487/RFC6205, March 2011,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6205>.

12.2.  Informative References

   [RFC2629]  Rose, M., "Writing I-Ds and RFCs using XML", RFC 2629,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2629, June 1999,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2629>.

   [RFC3410]  Case, J., Mundy, R., Partain, D., and B. Stewart,
              "Introduction and Applicability Statements for Internet-
              Standard Management Framework", RFC 3410,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC3410, December 2002,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3410>.

   [RFC4181]  Heard, C., Ed., "Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers of
              MIB Documents", BCP 111, RFC 4181, DOI 10.17487/RFC4181,
              September 2005, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4181>.





Hiremagalur, et al.     Expires September 2, 2018              [Page 12]


Internet-Draft   draft-dharinigert-ccamp-dwdm-if-lmp-06       March 2018


Authors' Addresses

   Dharini Hiremagalur (editor)
   Juniper
   1194 N Mathilda Avenue
   Sunnyvale - 94089 California
   USA

   Phone: +1408
   Email: dharinih@juniper.net


   Gert Grammel (editor)
   Juniper
   Oskar-Schlemmer Str. 15
   80807 Muenchen
   Germany

   Phone: +49 1725186386
   Email: ggrammel@juniper.net


   Gabriele Galimberti (editor)
   Cisco
   Via S. Maria Molgora, 48 c
   20871 - Vimercate
   Italy

   Phone: +390392091462
   Email: ggalimbe@cisco.com


   Ruediger Kunze
   Deutsche Telekom
   Dddd, xx
   Berlin
   Germany

   Phone: +49xxxxxxxxxx
   Email: RKunze@telekom.de











Hiremagalur, et al.     Expires September 2, 2018              [Page 13]


Internet-Draft   draft-dharinigert-ccamp-dwdm-if-lmp-06       March 2018


   Dieter Beller
   Nokia
   Lorenzstrasse, 10
   70435 Stuttgart
   Germany

   Phone: +4971182143125
   Email: Dieter.Beller@nokia.com











































Hiremagalur, et al.     Expires September 2, 2018              [Page 14]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.126, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/