doc: Add RFC documents

1 files changed, 675 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc7792.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc7792.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f98e933
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/rfc/rfc7792.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,675 @@
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                          F. Zhang
+Request for Comments: 7792                                      X. Zhang
+Category: Standards Track                                         Huawei
+ISSN: 2070-1721                                                A. Farrel
+                                                      Old Dog Consulting
+                                                     O. Gonzalez de Dios
+                                                              Telefonica
+                                                           D. Ceccarelli
+                                                                Ericsson
+                                                              March 2016
+
+
+         RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions in Support of Flexi-Grid
+         Dense Wavelength Division Multiplexing (DWDM) Networks
+
+Abstract
+
+   This memo describes the extensions to the Resource Reservation
+   Protocol - Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) signaling protocol to
+   support Label Switched Paths (LSPs) in a GMPLS-controlled network
+   that includes devices using the flexible optical grid.
+
+Status of This Memo
+
+   This is an Internet Standards Track document.
+
+   This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
+   (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has
+   received public review and has been approved for publication by the
+   Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Further information on
+   Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 5741.
+
+   Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
+   and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
+   http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7792.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Zhang, et al.                Standards Track                    [Page 1]
+
+RFC 7792         Flexi-Grid RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions      March 2016
+
+
+Copyright Notice
+
+   Copyright (c) 2016 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
+   (http://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 ....................................................3
+   2. Terminology .....................................................3
+      2.1. Conventions Used in This Document ..........................3
+   3. Requirements for Flexible-Grid Signaling ........................4
+      3.1. Slot Width .................................................4
+      3.2. Frequency Slot .............................................5
+   4. Protocol Extensions .............................................6
+      4.1. Traffic Parameters .........................................6
+           4.1.1. Applicability to Fixed-Grid Networks ................7
+      4.2. Generalized Label ..........................................7
+      4.3. Signaling Procedures .......................................7
+   5. IANA Considerations .............................................8
+      5.1. Class Types for RSVP Objects ...............................8
+   6. Manageability Considerations ....................................8
+   7. Security Considerations .........................................8
+   8. References ......................................................9
+      8.1. Normative References .......................................9
+      8.2. Informative References .....................................9
+   Acknowledgments ...................................................11
+   Contributors ......................................................11
+   Authors' Addresses ................................................12
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Zhang, et al.                Standards Track                    [Page 2]
+
+RFC 7792         Flexi-Grid RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions      March 2016
+
+
+1.  Introduction
+
+   [G.694.1] defines the Dense Wavelength Division Multiplexing (DWDM)
+   frequency grids for Wavelength Division Multiplexing (WDM)
+   applications.  A frequency grid is a reference set of frequencies
+   used to denote allowed nominal central frequencies that may be used
+   for defining applications that utilize WDM transmission.  The channel
+   spacing is the frequency spacing between two allowed nominal central
+   frequencies.  All of the wavelengths on a fiber use different central
+   frequencies and occupy a designated range of frequencies.
+
+   Fixed-grid channel spacing is selected from 12.5 GHz, 25 GHz, 50 GHz,
+   100 GHz, and integer multiples of 100 GHz.  Additionally, [G.694.1]
+   defines "flexible grids", also known as "flexi-grid".  The terms
+   "frequency slot" (i.e., the frequency range allocated to a specific
+   channel and unavailable to other channels within a flexible grid) and
+   "slot width" (i.e., the full width of a frequency slot in a flexible
+   grid) are introduced in [G.694.1] to define a flexible grid.
+
+   [RFC7698] defines a framework and the associated control-plane
+   requirements for the GMPLS-based [RFC3945] control of flexi-grid DWDM
+   networks.
+
+   [RFC6163] provides a framework for GMPLS and Path Computation Element
+   (PCE) control of Wavelength Switched Optical Networks (WSONs), and
+   [RFC7689] describes the requirements and protocol extensions for
+   signaling to set up Label Switched Paths (LSPs) in WSONs.
+
+   This document describes the additional requirements and protocol
+   extensions to Resource Reservation Protocol - Traffic Engineering
+   (RSVP-TE) [RFC3473] to set up LSPs in networks that support the
+   flexi-grid.
+
+2.  Terminology
+
+   For terminology related to flexi-grid, please refer to [RFC7698] and
+   [G.694.1].
+
+2.1.  Conventions Used in This Document
+
+   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
+   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
+   document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Zhang, et al.                Standards Track                    [Page 3]
+
+RFC 7792         Flexi-Grid RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions      March 2016
+
+
+3.  Requirements for Flexible-Grid Signaling
+
+   The architecture for establishing LSPs in a flexi-grid network is
+   described in [RFC7698].
+
+   An optical-spectrum LSP occupies a specific frequency slot, i.e., a
+   range of frequencies.  The process of computing a route and the
+   allocation of a frequency slot is referred to as "Routing and
+   Spectrum Assignment" (RSA).  [RFC7698] describes three architectural
+   approaches to RSA: combined RSA, separated RSA, and distributed SA.
+   The first two approaches are referred to as "centralized SA", because
+   routing (i.e., path determination) and spectrum assignment (i.e.,
+   selection of frequency slots) are both performed by a centralized
+   entity prior to the signaling procedure.
+
+   In the case of centralized SA, the assigned frequency slot is
+   specified in the RSVP-TE Path message during LSP setup.  In the case
+   of distributed SA, the slot width of the flexi-grid LSP is specified
+   in the Path message, allowing the network elements to select the
+   frequency slot to be used when they process the RSVP-TE messages.
+
+   If the capability to switch or convert the whole optical spectrum
+   allocated to an optical-spectrum LSP is not available at some nodes
+   along the path of the LSP, the LSP is subject to the Optical
+   "spectrum continuity constraint" as described in [RFC7698].
+
+   The remainder of this section states the additional requirements for
+   signaling in a flexi-grid network.
+
+3.1.  Slot Width
+
+   The slot width is an end-to-end parameter representing how much
+   frequency resource is requested for a flexi-grid LSP.  It is the
+   equivalent of optical bandwidth, although the amount of bandwidth
+   associated with a slot width will depend on the signal encoding.
+
+   Different LSPs may request different amounts of frequency resource in
+   flexible-grid networks, so the slot width MUST be carried in the
+   signaling message during LSP establishment.  This enables the nodes
+   along the LSP to know how much frequency resource has been requested
+   (in a Path message) and how much has been allocated (by a
+   Resv message) for the LSP.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Zhang, et al.                Standards Track                    [Page 4]
+
+RFC 7792         Flexi-Grid RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions      March 2016
+
+
+3.2.  Frequency Slot
+
+   The frequency slot information identifies which part of the frequency
+   spectrum is allocated on each link for an LSP in a flexi-grid
+   network.
+
+   This information MUST be present in a Resv message to indicate,
+   hop by hop, the central frequency of the allocated resource.  In
+   combination with the slot width indicated in a Resv message (see
+   Section 3.1), the central frequency carried in a Resv message
+   identifies the resources reserved for the LSP (known as the
+   frequency slot).
+
+   The frequency slot can be represented by two parameters, as follows:
+
+      Frequency slot = [(central frequency) - (slot width)/2] ~
+                       [(central frequency) + (slot width)/2]
+
+   As is common with other resource identifiers (i.e., labels) in GMPLS
+   signaling, it must be possible for the head-end node, when sending a
+   Path message, to suggest or require the central frequency to be used
+   for the LSP.  Furthermore, for bidirectional LSPs, the Path message
+   MUST be able to specify the central frequency to be used for
+   reverse-direction traffic.
+
+   As described in [G.694.1], the allowed frequency slots for the
+   flexible DWDM grid have a nominal central frequency (in THz),
+   defined by:
+
+      193.1 + n * 0.00625
+
+      where n is zero or a positive or negative integer.
+
+   The slot width (in GHz) is defined as:
+
+      12.5 * m
+
+      where m is a positive integer.
+
+   It is possible that an implementation supports only a subset of the
+   possible slot widths and central frequencies.  For example, an
+   implementation can be built that is
+
+   1. limited to have a nominal central frequency granularity of
+      12.5 GHz, by only allowing values of n that are even, and
+
+   2. further limited to only support slot widths of 25 GHz, by only
+      allowing values of m that are even.
+
+
+
+Zhang, et al.                Standards Track                    [Page 5]
+
+RFC 7792         Flexi-Grid RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions      March 2016
+
+
+   Further details can be found in [RFC7698].
+
+4.  Protocol Extensions
+
+   This section defines the extensions to RSVP-TE signaling for GMPLS
+   [RFC3473] to support flexible-grid networks.
+
+4.1.  Traffic Parameters
+
+   In RSVP-TE, the SENDER_TSPEC object in the Path message indicates the
+   requested resource reservation.  The FLOWSPEC object in the Resv
+   message indicates the actual resource reservation.  As described in
+   Section 3.1, the slot width represents how much frequency resource is
+   requested for a flexi-grid LSP.  That is, it describes the end-to-end
+   traffic profile of the LSP.  Therefore, the traffic parameters for a
+   flexi-grid LSP encode the slot width.
+
+   This document defines new Class Types (C-Types) for the SENDER_TSPEC
+   and FLOWSPEC objects to carry Spectrum-Switched Optical Network
+   (SSON) traffic parameters:
+
+      SSON SENDER_TSPEC: Class = 12, C-Type = 8.
+
+      SSON FLOWSPEC: Class = 9, C-Type = 8.
+
+   The SSON traffic parameters carried in both objects MUST have the
+   format shown in Figure 1.
+
+    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
+   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
+   |              m                |            Reserved           |
+   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
+
+                   Figure 1: The SSON Traffic Parameters
+
+      m (16 bits): a positive integer; the slot width is specified by
+                   m * 12.5 GHz.
+
+   The Reserved bits MUST be set to zero and ignored upon receipt.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Zhang, et al.                Standards Track                    [Page 6]
+
+RFC 7792         Flexi-Grid RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions      March 2016
+
+
+4.1.1.  Applicability to Fixed-Grid Networks
+
+   Note that the slot width (i.e., traffic parameters) of a fixed grid
+   defined in [G.694.1] can also be specified by using the SSON traffic
+   parameters.  The fixed-grid channel spacings (12.5 GHz, 25 GHz,
+   50 GHz, 100 GHz, and integer multiples of 100 GHz) are also the
+   multiples of 12.5 GHz, so the m parameter can be used to represent
+   these slot widths.
+
+   Therefore, it is possible to consider using the new traffic parameter
+   object types in common signaling messages for flexi-grid and legacy
+   DWDM networks.
+
+4.2.  Generalized Label
+
+   In the case of a flexible-grid network, the labels that have been
+   requested or allocated as signaled in the RSVP-TE objects are encoded
+   as described in [RFC7699].  This new label encoding can appear in any
+   RSVP-TE object or sub-object that can carry a label.
+
+   As noted in Section 4.2 of [RFC7699], the m parameter forms part of
+   the label as well as part of the traffic parameters.
+
+   As described in Section 4.3 of [RFC7699], a "compound label",
+   constructed from a concatenation of the flexi-grid labels, is used
+   when signaling an LSP that uses multiple flexi-grid slots.
+
+4.3.  Signaling Procedures
+
+   There are no differences between the signaling procedures described
+   for LSP control in [RFC7698] and those required for use in a
+   fixed-grid network [RFC7689].  Obviously, the TSpec, FlowSpec, and
+   label formats described in Sections 4.1 and 4.2 are used.  The
+   signaling procedures for distributed SA and centralized SA can be
+   applied.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Zhang, et al.                Standards Track                    [Page 7]
+
+RFC 7792         Flexi-Grid RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions      March 2016
+
+
+5.  IANA Considerations
+
+5.1.  Class Types for RSVP Objects
+
+   This document introduces two new Class Types for existing RSVP
+   objects.  IANA has made the following allocations from the "Resource
+   Reservation Protocol (RSVP) Parameters" registry using the "Class
+   Names, Class Numbers, and Class Types" sub-registry.
+
+       Class Number  Class Name                            Reference
+       ------------  -----------------------               ---------
+       9             FLOWSPEC                              [RFC2205]
+
+                     Class Type (C-Type):
+
+                     (8) SSON FLOWSPEC                     RFC 7792
+
+       Class Number  Class Name                            Reference
+       ------------  -----------------------               ---------
+       12            SENDER_TSPEC                          [RFC2205]
+
+                     Class Type (C-Type):
+
+                     (8) SSON SENDER_TSPEC                 RFC 7792
+
+6.  Manageability Considerations
+
+   This document makes minor modifications to GMPLS signaling but does
+   not change the manageability considerations for such networks.
+   Clearly, protocol analysis tools and other diagnostic aids (including
+   logging systems and MIB modules) will need to be enhanced to support
+   the new traffic parameters and label formats.
+
+7.  Security Considerations
+
+   This document introduces no new security considerations to [RFC3473].
+
+   See also [RFC5920] for a discussion of security considerations for
+   GMPLS signaling.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Zhang, et al.                Standards Track                    [Page 8]
+
+RFC 7792         Flexi-Grid RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions      March 2016
+
+
+8.  References
+
+8.1.  Normative References
+
+   [G.694.1]  International Telecommunication Union, "Spectral grids for
+              WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid", ITU-T
+              Recommendation G.694.1, February 2012,
+              <https://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-G.694.1/en>.
+
+   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
+              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
+              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
+              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
+
+   [RFC3473]  Berger, L., Ed., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label
+              Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Resource ReserVation
+              Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions",
+              RFC 3473, DOI 10.17487/RFC3473, January 2003,
+              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3473>.
+
+   [RFC7699]  Farrel, A., King, D., Li, Y., and F. Zhang, "Generalized
+              Labels for the Flexi-Grid in Lambda Switch Capable (LSC)
+              Label Switching Routers", RFC 7699, DOI 10.17487/RFC7699,
+              November 2015, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7699>.
+
+8.2.  Informative References
+
+   [RFC2205]  Braden, R., Ed., Zhang, L., Berson, S., Herzog, S., and S.
+              Jamin, "Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP) -- Version 1
+              Functional Specification", RFC 2205, DOI 10.17487/RFC2205,
+              September 1997, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2205>.
+
+   [RFC3945]  Mannie, E., Ed., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label
+              Switching (GMPLS) Architecture", RFC 3945,
+              DOI 10.17487/RFC3945, October 2004,
+              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3945>.
+
+   [RFC5920]  Fang, L., Ed., "Security Framework for MPLS and GMPLS
+              Networks", RFC 5920, DOI 10.17487/RFC5920, July 2010,
+              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5920>.
+
+   [RFC6163]  Lee, Y., Ed., Bernstein, G., Ed., and W. Imajuku,
+              "Framework for GMPLS and Path Computation Element (PCE)
+              Control of Wavelength Switched Optical Networks (WSONs)",
+              RFC 6163, DOI 10.17487/RFC6163, April 2011,
+              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6163>.
+
+
+
+
+
+Zhang, et al.                Standards Track                    [Page 9]
+
+RFC 7792         Flexi-Grid RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions      March 2016
+
+
+   [RFC7689]  Bernstein, G., Ed., Xu, S., Lee, Y., Ed., Martinelli, G.,
+              and H. Harai, "Signaling Extensions for Wavelength
+              Switched Optical Networks", RFC 7689,
+              DOI 10.17487/RFC7689, November 2015,
+              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7689>.
+
+   [RFC7698]  Gonzalez de Dios, O., Ed., Casellas, R., Ed., Zhang, F.,
+              Fu, X., Ceccarelli, D., and I. Hussain, "Framework and
+              Requirements for GMPLS-Based Control of Flexi-Grid Dense
+              Wavelength Division Multiplexing (DWDM) Networks",
+              RFC 7698, DOI 10.17487/RFC7698, November 2015,
+              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7698>.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Zhang, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 10]
+
+RFC 7792         Flexi-Grid RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions      March 2016
+
+
+Acknowledgments
+
+   This work was supported in part by the FP-7 IDEALIST project under
+   grant agreement number 317999.
+
+Contributors
+
+   Ramon Casellas
+   CTTC
+   Av. Carl Friedrich Gauss n7
+   Castelldefels, Barcelona  08860
+   Spain
+
+   Email: ramon.casellas@cttc.es
+
+
+   Felipe Jimenez Arribas
+   Telefonica Investigacion y Desarrollo
+   Emilio Vargas 6
+   Madrid  28045
+   Spain
+
+   Email: felipej@tid.es
+
+
+   Yi Lin
+   Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
+   F3-5-B R&D Center, Huawei Base
+   Bantian, Longgang District
+   Shenzhen  518129
+   China
+
+   Phone: +86 755-28972914
+   Email: yi.lin@huawei.com
+
+
+   Qilei Wang
+   ZTE
+
+   Email: wang.qilei@zte.com.cn
+
+
+   Haomian Zheng
+   Huawei Technologies
+
+   Email: zhenghaomian@huawei.com
+
+
+
+
+
+Zhang, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 11]
+
+RFC 7792         Flexi-Grid RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions      March 2016
+
+
+Authors' Addresses
+
+   Fatai Zhang
+   Huawei Technologies
+
+   Email: zhangfatai@huawei.com
+
+
+   Xian Zhang
+   Huawei Technologies
+
+   Email: zhang.xian@huawei.com
+
+
+   Adrian Farrel
+   Old Dog Consulting
+
+   Email: adrian@olddog.co.uk
+
+
+   Oscar Gonzalez de Dios
+   Telefonica Investigacion y Desarrollo
+   Ronda de la Comunicacion S/N
+   Madrid  28050
+   Spain
+
+   Phone: +34 913129647
+   Email: oscar.gonzalezdedios@telefonica.com
+
+
+   Daniele Ceccarelli
+   Ericsson
+   Via A. Negrone 1/A
+   Genova - Sestri Ponente
+   Italy
+
+   Email: daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Zhang, et al.                Standards Track                   [Page 12]
+