<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?><!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd" [ <!ENTITY RFC2119 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml"> <!ENTITY RFC3209 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3209.xml"> <!ENTITY RFC3630 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3630.xml"> <!ENTITY RFC5329 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5329.xml"> <!ENTITY RFC5440 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5440.xml"> <!ENTITY RFC6205 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.6205.xml"> <!ENTITY RFC7570 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.7570.xml"> <!ENTITY RFC7579 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.7579.xml"> <!ENTITY RFC7581 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.7581.xml"> <!ENTITY RFC7689 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.7689.xml"> <!ENTITY RFC7688 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.7688.xml"> <!ENTITY RFC8174 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8174.xml"> <!ENTITY RFC8253 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8253.xml"> <!ENTITY RFC3471 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3471.xml"> <!ENTITY RFC4203 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.4203.xml"> <!ENTITY RFC4204 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.4204.xml"> <!ENTITY RFC4655 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.4655.xml"> <!ENTITY RFC5420 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5420.xml"> <!ENTITY RFC5521 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5521.xml"> <!ENTITY RFC6163 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.6163.xml"> <!ENTITY RFC6566 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.6566.xml"> <!ENTITY RFC7446 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.7446.xml"> <!ENTITY RFC7449 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.7449.xml"> <!ENTITY RFC8126 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.8126.xml"> ]><rfcsubmissionType="IETF" docName="draft-ietf-pce-wson-rwa-ext-17"xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude" version="3" category="std"ipr="trust200902"> <!-- Generated by id2xml 1.5.0 on 2020-02-05T20:57:21Z --> <?rfc strict="yes"?> <?rfc compact="yes"?> <?rfc subcompact="no"?> <?rfc symrefs="yes"?> <?rfc sortrefs="no"?> <?rfc text-list-symbols="oo*+-"?> <?rfc toc="yes"?>consensus="true" docName="draft-ietf-pce-wson-rwa-ext-17" indexInclude="true" ipr="trust200902" number="8780" prepTime="2020-07-21T15:47:03" scripts="Common,Latin" sortRefs="true" submissionType="IETF" symRefs="true" tocDepth="3" tocInclude="true" xml:lang="en"> <link href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pce-wson-rwa-ext-17" rel="prev"/> <link href="https://dx.doi.org/10.17487/rfc8780" rel="alternate"/> <link href="urn:issn:2070-1721" rel="alternate"/> <front> <title abbrev="PCEP Extension for WSONRWA">PCEPRWA">The Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extension forWSONWavelength Switched Optical Network (WSON) Routing and WavelengthAssignment</title>Assignment (RWA)</title> <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8780" stream="IETF"/> <author initials="Y." surname="Lee" fullname="YoungLee, Editor"Lee" role="editor"><organization>Huawei Technologies</organization> <address><postal><street>5700 Tennyson Parkway Suite 600</street> <street>Plano, TX 75024</street> <street>United States of America</street><organization showOnFrontPage="true">Samsung Electronics</organization> <address> <postal> <street/> <city/> <region/> <code/> <country/> </postal><email>leeyoung@huawei.com</email><email>younglee.tx@gmail.com</email> </address> </author> <author initials="R." surname="Casellas" fullname="Ramon Casellas, Editor" role="editor"> <organizationabbrev="CTTC">CarlshowOnFrontPage="true">CTTC</organization> <address> <postal> <extaddr>Carl Friedrich Gauss7</organization> <address><postal><street>CTTC PMT7</extaddr> <street>PMT Ed B4 Av.</street><street>Castelldefels Barcelona 08860</street> <street>Spain</street><city>Castelldefels</city> <region>Barcelona</region> <code>08860</code> <country>Spain</country> </postal><phone>(34)<phone>+34 936452916</phone> <email>ramon.casellas@cttc.es</email> </address> </author> <dateyear="2020" month="February"/> <abstract><t>month="07" year="2020"/> <abstract pn="section-abstract"> <t pn="section-abstract-1"> This document providesthePath Computation ElementcommunicationCommunication Protocol (PCEP) extensions for the support of Routing and Wavelength Assignment (RWA) in Wavelength Switched Optical Networks(WSON).(WSONs). Path provisioning in WSONs requiresa routing and wavelength assignment (RWA)an RWA process. From a path computation perspective, wavelength assignment is the process of determining which wavelength can be used on each hop of a path and forms an additional routing constraint to optical path computation.</t> </abstract></front> <middle><boilerplate> <sectiontitle="Terminology" anchor="sect-1"><t>anchor="status-of-memo" numbered="false" removeInRFC="false" toc="exclude" pn="section-boilerplate.1"> <name slugifiedName="name-status-of-this-memo">Status of This Memo</name> <t pn="section-boilerplate.1-1"> This is an Internet Standards Track document. </t> <t pn="section-boilerplate.1-2"> This documentusesis a product of theterminology definedInternet 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<xref target="RFC4655"/>,Section 2 of RFC 7841. </t> <t pn="section-boilerplate.1-3"> Information about the current status of this document, any errata, and<xref target="RFC5440"/>.</t>how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at <eref target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8780" brackets="none"/>. </t> </section> <sectiontitle="Requirements Language" anchor="sect-2"><t> The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY",anchor="copyright" numbered="false" removeInRFC="false" toc="exclude" pn="section-boilerplate.2"> <name slugifiedName="name-copyright-notice">Copyright Notice</name> <t pn="section-boilerplate.2-1"> Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and"OPTIONAL" in thisthe persons identified as the documentareauthors. All rights reserved. </t> <t pn="section-boilerplate.2-2"> This document is subject tobe interpreted as described inBCP14 <xref target="RFC2119"/> <xref target="RFC8174"/> when,78 andonly when, they appearthe IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (<eref target="https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info" brackets="none"/>) inall capitals, as shown here.</t> </section> <section title="Introduction" anchor="sect-3"><t> <xref target="RFC5440"/> specifieseffect on thePath Computation Element (PCE) Communication Protocol (PCEP) for communications between a Path Computation Client (PCC)date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights anda PCE, or between two PCEs. Such interactionsrestrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must includepath computation requests and path computation replies as wellSimplified BSD License text asnotificationsdescribed in Section 4.e ofspecific states related totheuse of a PCETrust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in thecontextSimplified BSD License. </t> </section> </boilerplate> <toc> <section anchor="toc" numbered="false" removeInRFC="false" toc="exclude" pn="section-toc.1"> <name slugifiedName="name-table-of-contents">Table of Contents</name> <ul bare="true" empty="true" indent="2" spacing="compact" pn="section-toc.1-1"> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.1"> <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.1.1"><xref derivedContent="1" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-1"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-introduction">Introduction</xref></t> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.2"> <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.2.1"><xref derivedContent="2" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-2"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-terminology">Terminology</xref></t> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.3"> <t keepWithNext="true" pn="section-toc.1-1.3.1"><xref derivedContent="3" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-3"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-requirements-language">Requirements Language</xref></t> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.4"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.4.1"><xref derivedContent="4" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-4"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-encoding-of-an-rwa-path-req">Encoding ofMultiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) and Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Traffic Engineering.</t> <t> A PCC is said to be any network component that makes such a request and may be, for instance,anOptical Switching Element within a Wavelength Division Multiplexing (WDM) network. The PCE, itself, can beRWA Path Request</xref></t> <ul bare="true" empty="true" indent="2" spacing="compact" pn="section-toc.1-1.4.2"> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.4.2.1"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.4.2.1.1"><xref derivedContent="4.1" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-4.1"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-wavelength-assignment-wa-ob">Wavelength Assignment (WA) Object</xref></t> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.4.2.2"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.4.2.2.1"><xref derivedContent="4.2" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-4.2"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-wavelength-selection-tlv">Wavelength Selection TLV</xref></t> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.4.2.3"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.4.2.3.1"><xref derivedContent="4.3" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-4.3"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-wavelength-restriction-tlv">Wavelength Restriction TLV</xref></t> <ul bare="true" empty="true" indent="2" spacing="compact" pn="section-toc.1-1.4.2.3.2"> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.4.2.3.2.1"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.4.2.3.2.1.1"><xref derivedContent="4.3.1" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-4.3.1"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-link-identifier-field">Link Identifier Field</xref></t> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.4.2.3.2.2"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.4.2.3.2.2.1"><xref derivedContent="4.3.2" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-4.3.2"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-wavelength-constraint-field">Wavelength Constraint Field</xref></t> </li> </ul> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.4.2.4"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.4.2.4.1"><xref derivedContent="4.4" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-4.4"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-signal-processing-capabilit">Signal Processing Capability Restrictions</xref></t> <ul bare="true" empty="true" indent="2" spacing="compact" pn="section-toc.1-1.4.2.4.2"> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.4.2.4.2.1"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.4.2.4.2.1.1"><xref derivedContent="4.4.1" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-4.4.1"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-signal-processing-exclusion">Signal Processing Exclusion</xref></t> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.4.2.4.2.2"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.4.2.4.2.2.1"><xref derivedContent="4.4.2" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-4.4.2"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-signal-processing-inclusion">Signal Processing Inclusion</xref></t> </li> </ul> </li> </ul> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.5"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.5.1"><xref derivedContent="5" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-5"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-encoding-of-an-rwa-path-rep">Encoding of an RWA Path Reply</xref></t> <ul bare="true" empty="true" indent="2" spacing="compact" pn="section-toc.1-1.5.2"> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.5.2.1"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.5.2.1.1"><xref derivedContent="5.1" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-5.1"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-wavelength-allocation-tlv">Wavelength Allocation TLV</xref></t> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.5.2.2"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.5.2.2.1"><xref derivedContent="5.2" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-5.2"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-error-indicator">Error Indicator</xref></t> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.5.2.3"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.5.2.3.1"><xref derivedContent="5.3" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-5.3"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-no-path-indicator">NO-PATH Indicator</xref></t> </li> </ul> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.6"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.6.1"><xref derivedContent="6" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-6"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-manageability-consideration">Manageability Considerations</xref></t> <ul bare="true" empty="true" indent="2" spacing="compact" pn="section-toc.1-1.6.2"> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.6.2.1"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.6.2.1.1"><xref derivedContent="6.1" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-6.1"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-control-of-function-and-pol">Control of Function and Policy</xref></t> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.6.2.2"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.6.2.2.1"><xref derivedContent="6.2" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-6.2"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-liveness-detection-and-moni">Liveness Detection and Monitoring</xref></t> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.6.2.3"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.6.2.3.1"><xref derivedContent="6.3" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-6.3"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-verifying-correct-operation">Verifying Correct Operation</xref></t> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.6.2.4"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.6.2.4.1"><xref derivedContent="6.4" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-6.4"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-requirements-on-other-proto">Requirements on Other Protocols and Functional Components</xref></t> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.6.2.5"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.6.2.5.1"><xref derivedContent="6.5" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-6.5"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-impact-on-network-operation">Impact on Network Operation</xref></t> </li> </ul> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.7"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.7.1"><xref derivedContent="7" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-7"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-security-considerations">Security Considerations</xref></t> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.8"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.8.1"><xref derivedContent="8" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-8"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-iana-considerations">IANA Considerations</xref></t> <ul bare="true" empty="true" indent="2" spacing="compact" pn="section-toc.1-1.8.2"> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.8.2.1"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.8.2.1.1"><xref derivedContent="8.1" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-8.1"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-new-pcep-object-wavelength-">New PCEP Object: Wavelength Assignment Object</xref></t> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.8.2.2"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.8.2.2.1"><xref derivedContent="8.2" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-8.2"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-wa-object-flag-field">WA Object Flag Field</xref></t> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.8.2.3"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.8.2.3.1"><xref derivedContent="8.3" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-8.3"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-new-pcep-tlv-wavelength-sel">New PCEP TLV: Wavelength Selection TLV</xref></t> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.8.2.4"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.8.2.4.1"><xref derivedContent="8.4" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-8.4"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-new-pcep-tlv-wavelength-res">New PCEP TLV: Wavelength Restriction TLV</xref></t> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.8.2.5"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.8.2.5.1"><xref derivedContent="8.5" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-8.5"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-wavelength-restriction-tlv-a">Wavelength Restriction TLV Action Values</xref></t> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.8.2.6"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.8.2.6.1"><xref derivedContent="8.6" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-8.6"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-new-pcep-tlv-wavelength-all">New PCEP TLV: Wavelength Allocation TLV</xref></t> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.8.2.7"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.8.2.7.1"><xref derivedContent="8.7" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-8.7"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-wavelength-allocation-tlv-f">Wavelength Allocation TLV Flag Field</xref></t> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.8.2.8"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.8.2.8.1"><xref derivedContent="8.8" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-8.8"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-new-pcep-tlv-optical-interf">New PCEP TLV: Optical Interface Class List TLV</xref></t> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.8.2.9"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.8.2.9.1"><xref derivedContent="8.9" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-8.9"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-new-pcep-tlv-client-signal-">New PCEP TLV: Client Signal Information TLV</xref></t> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.8.2.10"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.8.2.10.1"><xref derivedContent="8.10" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-8.10"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-new-bit-flag-for-no-path-ve">New Bit Flag for NO-PATH-VECTOR TLV</xref></t> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.8.2.11"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.8.2.11.1"><xref derivedContent="8.11" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-8.11"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-new-error-types-and-error-v">New Error-Types and Error-Values</xref></t> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.8.2.12"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.8.2.12.1"><xref derivedContent="8.12" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-8.12"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-new-subobjects-for-the-excl">New Subobjects for the Exclude Route Object</xref></t> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.8.2.13"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.8.2.13.1"><xref derivedContent="8.13" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-8.13"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-new-subobjects-for-the-incl">New Subobjects for the Include Route Object</xref></t> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.8.2.14"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.8.2.14.1"><xref derivedContent="8.14" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-8.14"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-request-for-updated-note-fo">Request for Updated Note for LMP TE Link Object Class Type</xref></t> </li> </ul> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.9"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.9.1"><xref derivedContent="9" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-9"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-references">References</xref></t> <ul bare="true" empty="true" indent="2" spacing="compact" pn="section-toc.1-1.9.2"> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.9.2.1"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.9.2.1.1"><xref derivedContent="9.1" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-9.1"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-normative-references">Normative References</xref></t> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.9.2.2"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.9.2.2.1"><xref derivedContent="9.2" format="counter" sectionFormat="of" target="section-9.2"/>. <xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-informative-references">Informative References</xref></t> </li> </ul> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.10"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.10.1"><xref derivedContent="" format="none" sectionFormat="of" target="section-appendix.a"/><xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-acknowledgments">Acknowledgments</xref></t> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.11"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.11.1"><xref derivedContent="" format="none" sectionFormat="of" target="section-appendix.b"/><xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-contributors">Contributors</xref></t> </li> <li pn="section-toc.1-1.12"> <t pn="section-toc.1-1.12.1"><xref derivedContent="" format="none" sectionFormat="of" target="section-appendix.c"/><xref derivedContent="" format="title" sectionFormat="of" target="name-authors-addresses">Authors' Addresses</xref></t> </li> </ul> </section> </toc> </front> <middle> <section anchor="sect-3" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-1"> <name slugifiedName="name-introduction">Introduction</name> <t pn="section-1-1"> <xref target="RFC5440" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC5440"/> specifies the Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) for communications between a Path Computation Client (PCC) and a PCE, or between two PCEs. Such interactions include Path Computation Requests (PCReqs) and Path Computation Replies (PCReps) as well as notifications of specific states related to the use of a PCE in the context of Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) and Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Traffic Engineering (TE).</t> <t pn="section-1-2"> A PCC is said to be any network component that makes such a request and may be, for instance, an optical switching element within a Wavelength Division Multiplexing (WDM) network. The PCE, itself, can be located anywhere within thenetwork,network and may be within an optical switching element, a Network Management System(NMS)(NMS), or an Operational Support System (OSS), or it may be an independent network server.</t><t><t pn="section-1-3"> This document provides the PCEP extensions for the support of Routing and Wavelength Assignment (RWA) in Wavelength Switched Optical Networks(WSON)(WSONs) based on the requirements specified in <xreftarget="RFC6163"/>target="RFC6163" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6163"/> and <xreftarget="RFC7449"/>.</t> <t>target="RFC7449" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC7449"/>.</t> <t pn="section-1-4"> WSON refers toWDM basedWDM-based optical networks in which switching is performed selectively based on the wavelength of an optical signal. The devices used in WSONs that are able to switch signals based on signal wavelength are known as Lambda Switch Capable (LSC). WSONs can be transparent or translucent. A transparent optical network is made up of optical devices that can switch but not convert from one wavelength to another, all within the optical domain. On the other hand, translucent networks include 3R regenerators(Re-amplification, Re-shaping, Re-timing)(reamplification, reshaping, and retiming) that are sparsely placed. The main function of the 3R regenerators is to convert one optical wavelength to another.</t><t> A Lambda Switch Capable (LSC)<t pn="section-1-5"> An LSC Label Switched Path (LSP) may span one or several transparent segments, which are delimited by 3R regenerators typically with electronic regenerator and optional wavelength conversion. Each transparent segment or path in WSON is referred to as an optical path. An optical path may span multiple fiberlinkslinks, and the path should be assigned the same wavelength for each link. Insucha case, the optical path is said to satisfy the wavelength-continuity constraint. <xreftarget="fig-1"/>target="fig-1" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 1"/> illustrates the relationship betweenaan LSC LSP and transparent segments (optical paths).</t> <figuretitle="Illustrationanchor="fig-1" align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="figure-1"> <name slugifiedName="name-illustration-of-an-lsc-lsp-">Illustration ofaan LSC LSP andtransparent segments" anchor="fig-1"><artwork><![CDATA[Transparent Segments</name> <artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt="" pn="section-1-6.1"> +---+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ | |I1 | | | | | | I2| | | |o------| |-------[(3R) ]------| |--------o| | | | | | | | | | | | +---+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ (X LSC) (LSC LSC) (LSC LSC) (LSC X)<-------> <-------> <-----> <-------> <-----------------------><----------------------><-------> <-------> <-----> <-------> <-----------------------><----------------------> Transparent Segment Transparent Segment<-------------------------------------------------><-------------------------------------------------> LSC LSP]]></artwork></artwork> </figure><t><t pn="section-1-7"> Note that two transparent segments within a WSON LSP do not need to operate on the same wavelength (due tothewavelength conversion capabilities). Two optical channels that share a common fiber link cannot be assigned the same wavelength;Otherwise,otherwise, the two signals would interfere with each other. Note that advanced additional multiplexing techniques such aspolarization basedpolarization-based multiplexing are not addressed in this document since thephysical layerphysical-layer aspects are not currently standardized. Therefore, assigning the proper wavelength on a path is an essential requirement in the optical path computation process.</t><t><t pn="section-1-8"> When a switching node has the ability to perform wavelength conversion, the wavelength-continuity constraint can be relaxed, anda LSC Label Switched Path (LSP)an LSP may use different wavelengths on different links along its route from origin to destination. It is, however, to be noted that wavelength converters may be limited due to their relatively high cost, while the number of WDM channels that can be supported in a fiber is also limited. As a WSON can be composed of network nodes that cannot perform wavelength conversion, nodes with limited wavelength conversion, and nodes with full wavelength conversion abilities, wavelength assignment is an additional routing constraint to be considered in all optical path computation.</t><t><t pn="section-1-9"> For example (see <xreftarget="fig-1"/>),target="fig-1" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 1"/>), within a translucent WSON,aan LSC LSP may be established between interfaces I1 and I2, spanning2two transparent segments (optical paths) where the wavelength continuity constraint applies(i.e.(i.e., the same unique wavelength must be assigned to the LSP at each TE link of the segment). If the LSC LSP induced a Forwarding Adjacency / TE link, the switching capabilities of the TE link would be (XX)X), where X refers to the switching capability of I1 and I2. For example, X can be Packet Switch Capable (PSC),Time DivisionTime-Division Multiplexing (TDM), etc.</t><t><t pn="section-1-10"> This document aligns withGMPLS extensions for PCEP<xreftarget="PCEP-GMPLS"/>target="RFC8779" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC8779"/> for generic properties such as label,label-setlabel set, and labelassignmentassignment, noting that a wavelength is a type of label. Wavelength restrictions and constraints are also formulated in terms of labels per <xreftarget="RFC7579"/>.</t> <t>target="RFC7579" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC7579"/>.</t> <t pn="section-1-11"> The optical modulation properties, which are also referred to as signal compatibility, are already considered in the signaling in <xreftarget="RFC7581"/>target="RFC7581" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC7581"/> and <xreftarget="RFC7688"/>.target="RFC7688" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC7688"/>. In order to improve the signal quality and limit some opticaleffectseffects, several advanced modulation processing capabilities are used by the mechanisms specified in this document. These modulation capabilitiescontributenot only contribute to optical signal quality checks but also constrain the selection of sender and receiver, as they should have matching signal processing capabilities. This document includes signal compatibility constraints as part of RWA path computation. That is, the signal processing capabilities (e.g., modulation and Forward Error Correction (FEC)) indicated by means ofoptical interface classthe Optical Interface Class (OIC) must be compatible between the sender and the receiver of the optical path across all optical elements.</t><t><t pn="section-1-12"> This document, however, does not address optical impairments as part of RWA path computation. See <xreftarget="RFC6566"/>target="RFC6566" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6566"/> for the framework for optical impairments.</t> </section> <sectiontitle="Encodinganchor="sect-1" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-2"> <name slugifiedName="name-terminology">Terminology</name> <t pn="section-2-1"> This document uses the terminology defined in <xref target="RFC4655" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC4655"/> and <xref target="RFC5440" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC5440"/>.</t> </section> <section anchor="sect-2" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-3"> <name slugifiedName="name-requirements-language">Requirements Language</name> <t pn="section-3-1"> The key words "<bcp14>MUST</bcp14>", "<bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>REQUIRED</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHALL</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHALL NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHOULD NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>RECOMMENDED</bcp14>", "<bcp14>NOT RECOMMENDED</bcp14>", "<bcp14>MAY</bcp14>", and "<bcp14>OPTIONAL</bcp14>" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 <xref target="RFC2119" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC2119"/> <xref target="RFC8174" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC8174"/> when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here. </t> </section> <section anchor="sect-4" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-4"> <name slugifiedName="name-encoding-of-an-rwa-path-req">Encoding ofaan RWA PathRequest" anchor="sect-4"><t>Request</name> <t pn="section-4-1"> <xreftarget="fig-2"/>target="fig-2" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Figure 2"/> shows one typicalPCE basedPCE-based implementation, which is referred to as the Combined Process (R&WA). With this architecture, the two processes of routing and wavelength assignment are accessed via a single PCE. This architecture is the base architecture specified in <xreftarget="RFC6163"/>target="RFC6163" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6163"/>, and the PCEP extensions that are specified in this document are based on this architecture.</t> <figuretitle="Combinedanchor="fig-2" align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="figure-2"> <name slugifiedName="name-combined-process-rwa-archit">Combined Process (R&WA)architecture" anchor="fig-2"><artwork><![CDATA[Architecture</name> <artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt="" pn="section-4-2.1"> +----------------------------+ +-----+ | +-------+ +--+ | | | | |Routing| |WA| | | PCC|<----->||<----->| +-------+ +--+ | | | | | +-----+ | PCE | +----------------------------+]]></artwork></artwork> </figure> <sectiontitle="Wavelengthanchor="sect-4.1" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-4.1"> <name slugifiedName="name-wavelength-assignment-wa-ob">Wavelength Assignment (WA)Object" anchor="sect-4.1"><t>Object</name> <t pn="section-4.1-1"> Wavelength allocation can be performed by the PCE bydifferent means: <list style="format (%c)"> <t>Bymeansof Explicitof: </t> <ol spacing="normal" type="(%c)" start="1" pn="section-4.1-2"> <li pn="section-4.1-2.1" derivedCounter="(a)">Explicit Label Control <xreftarget="RFC3471"/>target="RFC3471" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC3471"/> where the PCE allocates which label to use for each interface/node along the path. The allocated labelsMAY<bcp14>MAY</bcp14> appear after an interface routesubobject.</t> <t>By means of asubobject.</li> <li pn="section-4.1-2.2" derivedCounter="(b)">A Label Set where the PCE provides a range of potential labels toallocatebe allocated by each node along thepath.</t> </list> </t> <t>path.</li> </ol> <t pn="section-4.1-3"> Option (b) allows distributed label allocation (performed during signaling) to complete wavelength assignment.</t><t><t pn="section-4.1-4"> Additionally, given a range of potential labels to allocate, aPC Request SHOULDPCReq <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> convey the heuristic/or mechanism used for the allocation.</t><t> The<t pn="section-4.1-5"> Per <xref target="RFC5440" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC5440"/>, the format of a PCReq messageper <xref target="RFC5440"/>after incorporating the Wavelength Assignment (WA) object is as follows:</t><figure><artwork><![CDATA[ <PCReq Message><sourcecode type="rbnf" markers="false" pn="section-4.1-6"> <PCReq Message> ::=<Common Header> [<svec-list>] <request-list> Where: <request-list>::=<request>[<request-list>] <request>::= <RP> <END-POINTS> <WA><Common Header> [<svec-list>] <request-list> </sourcecode> <t pn="section-4.1-7"> Where:</t> <sourcecode type="rbnf" markers="false" pn="section-4.1-8"> <request-list>::=<request>[<request-list>] <request>::= <RP> <END-POINTS> <WA> [other optional objects...]]]></artwork> </figure> <t></sourcecode> <t pn="section-4.1-9"> If the WA object is present in the request, itMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be encoded after the END-POINTS object as defined in <xreftarget="PCEP-GMPLS"/>.target="RFC8779" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC8779"/>. The WAObjectobject is mandatory in this document. Orderings for the other optional objects are irrelevant.</t><t><t pn="section-4.1-10"> For the WA object, the Object-Class is(TBD1) (To be assigned by IANA).</t> <t> WA42, and the Object-Type is 1.</t><t>The<t pn="section-4.1-11">The format of the WA object body is as follows:</t> <figuretitle="WA Object" anchor="fig-3"><artwork><![CDATA[anchor="fig-3" align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="figure-3"> <name slugifiedName="name-wa-object">WA Object</name> <artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt="" pn="section-4.1-12.1"> 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Reserved | Flags |M| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | // TLVs // | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+]]></artwork></artwork> </figure><t><list style="symbols"> <t>Reserved<dl newline="false" spacing="normal" pn="section-4.1-13"> <dt pn="section-4.1-13.1">Reserved (16bits): Reservedbits):</dt> <dd pn="section-4.1-13.2">Reserved for future use andSHOULD<bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> be zeroed and ignored onreceipt.</t> <t>Flagsreceipt.</dd> <dt pn="section-4.1-13.3">Flags field (16bits)</t> </list> </t> <t> Onebits):</dt> <dd pn="section-4.1-13.4"> <t pn="section-4.1-13.4.1">One flag bit is allocated asfollows: <list style="hanging" hangIndent="6"> <t hangText="M (Mode - 1 bit):">follows:</t> <dl newline="false" spacing="normal" pn="section-4.1-13.4.2"> <dt pn="section-4.1-13.4.2.1">M (1 bit):</dt> <dd pn="section-4.1-13.4.2.2">Wavelength Allocation Mode. The M bit is used to indicate the mode of wavelength assignment. When the M bit is set to 1, this indicates that the label assigned by the PCE must be explicit. That is, the selected way to convey the allocated wavelength is by means of Explicit Label Control for each hop of a computed LSP. Otherwise (M bit is set to 0), the label assigned by the PCE need not be explicit (i.e., it can be suggested in the form oflabel setLabel Set objects in the corresponding response, to allow distributed WA. If M is 0, the PCEMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> return a Label Set Field as described inSection 2.6 of<xreftarget="RFC7579"/>target="RFC7579" sectionFormat="of" section="2.6" format="default" derivedLink="https://rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7579#section-2.6" derivedContent="RFC7579"/> in the response. SeeSection 5<xref target="sect-5" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 5"/> of this document for the encoding discussion of a Label Set Field in a PCRepmessage.</t> </list> </t> <t>Allmessage.</dd> </dl> <t pn="section-4.1-13.4.3">All unused flagsSHOULD<bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> be zeroed. IANAis to createhas created a new registry to manage theFlagFlags field of the WAobject. <list style="symbols"> <t>TLVs (variable). Inobject.</t> </dd> <dt pn="section-4.1-13.5">TLVs (variable):</dt> <dd pn="section-4.1-13.6"> <t pn="section-4.1-13.6.1">In the TLVs field, the following two TLVs are defined. At least one TLVMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be present.</t></list> <list style="hanging" hangIndent="3"> <t hangText="Wavelength<dl newline="false" spacing="normal" pn="section-4.1-13.6.2"> <dt pn="section-4.1-13.6.2.1">Wavelength SelectionTLV:"> A TLV ofTLV:</dt> <dd pn="section-4.1-13.6.2.2">The type(TBD2) withof this TLV is 8, and it has a fixed length of 32bits indicatingbits. This TLV indicates the wavelength selection. See <xreftarget="sect-4.2"/> for details.</t> <t hangText="Wavelengthtarget="sect-4.2" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 4.2"/> for details.</dd> <dt pn="section-4.1-13.6.2.3">Wavelength RestrictionConstraint TLV:"> A TLV ofTLV:</dt> <dd pn="section-4.1-13.6.2.4">The type(TBD3) withof this TLV is 9, and it has a variablelength indicatinglength. This TLV indicates wavelength restrictions. See <xreftarget="sect-4.3"/> for details.</t> </list> </t>target="sect-4.3" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 4.3"/> for details.</dd> </dl> </dd> </dl> </section> <sectiontitle="Wavelengthanchor="sect-4.2" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-4.2"> <name slugifiedName="name-wavelength-selection-tlv">Wavelength SelectionTLV" anchor="sect-4.2"><t>TLV</name> <t pn="section-4.2-1"> The Wavelength Selection TLV is used to indicate the wavelength selection constraint in regard to the order of wavelength assignment to be returned by the PCE. This TLV is only applied when the M bit is set in the WAObjectobject specified in <xreftarget="sect-4.1"/>.target="sect-4.1" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 4.1"/>. This TLVMUST NOT<bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14> be used when the M bit is cleared.</t><t><t pn="section-4.2-2"> The encoding of this TLV is specified as theWavelength Selection Sub-TLVWavelengthSelection sub-TLV inSection 4.2.2 of<xreftarget="RFC7689"/>.target="RFC7689" sectionFormat="of" section="4.2.2" format="default" derivedLink="https://rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7689#section-4.2.2" derivedContent="RFC7689"/>. IANAis to allocatehas allocated a new TLVtype,type for the Wavelength Selection TLVtype (TBD2).</t>(Type 8).</t> </section> <sectiontitle="Wavelengthanchor="sect-4.3" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-4.3"> <name slugifiedName="name-wavelength-restriction-tlv">Wavelength RestrictionConstraint TLV" anchor="sect-4.3"><t>TLV</name> <t pn="section-4.3-1"> For any request that contains a wavelength assignment, the requester (PCC)MUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> specify a restriction on the wavelengths to be used. This restriction is to be interpreted by the PCE as a constraint on the tuning ability of the origination laser transmitter or on any othermaintenance relatedmaintenance-related constraints. Note that if theLSPLSC LSP spans different segments, the PCE must have mechanisms to know the tunability restrictions of the involved wavelengthconverters / regenerators, e.g.converters/regenerators, e.g., by means of the Traffic Engineering Database (TED)eithervia either IGP orNetwork Management System (NMS).NMS. Even if the PCE knows the tunability of the transmitter, the PCC must be able to apply additional constraints to the request.</t><t><t pn="section-4.3-2"> The format of the Wavelength RestrictionConstraintTLV is as follows:</t><figure><artwork><![CDATA[ <Wavelength Restriction Constraint><sourcecode type="rbnf" markers="false" pn="section-4.3-3"> <Wavelength Restriction> ::=(<Action> <Count> <Reserved> <Link Identifiers> <Wavelength Restriction>)... Where <Link Identifiers>(<Action> <Count> <Reserved> <Link Identifiers> <Wavelength Constraint>)... </sourcecode> <t pn="section-4.3-4">Where:</t> <sourcecode type="rbnf" markers="false" pn="section-4.3-5"> <Link Identifiers> ::=<Link Identifier> [<Link Identifiers>] ]]></artwork> </figure> <t>See Section 4.3.1.<Link Identifier> [<Link Identifiers>] </sourcecode> <t pn="section-4.3-6">See <xref target="sect-4.3.1" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 4.3.1"/> for the encoding of the LinkIdentifiers Field.</t> <t>Identifier field.</t> <t pn="section-4.3-7"> These fields (i.e., <Action>, <LinkIdentifiers>Identifiers>, and <WavelengthRestriction>,Constraint>, etc.)MAY<bcp14>MAY</bcp14> appear together more than once to be able to specify multiple actions and their restrictions.</t><t><t pn="section-4.3-8"> IANAis to allocate ahas allocated a new TLVtype,type for the Wavelength RestrictionConstraintTLVtype (TBD3).</t> <t>The(Type 9).</t> <t pn="section-4.3-9">The TLV data is defined as follows:</t> <figuretitle="Wavelengthanchor="fig-4" align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="figure-4"> <name slugifiedName="name-wavelength-restriction-tlv-">Wavelength RestrictionConstraintTLVEncoding" anchor="fig-4"><artwork><![CDATA[Encoding</name> <artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt="" pn="section-4.3-10.1"> 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Action | Count | Reserved | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Link IdentifiersField| // . . . // +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | WavelengthRestriction FieldConstraint | // . . . . // +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ~ . . . . ~ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Action | Count | Reserved | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Link IdentifiersField| // . . . // +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | WavelengthRestriction FieldConstraint | // . . . . // +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+]]></artwork></artwork> </figure><t><list style="symbols"><t>Action<dl newline="true" spacing="normal" pn="section-4.3-11"> <dt pn="section-4.3-11.1">Action (8bits): <list style="symbols"><t>0 - Inclusive List indicatesbits):</dt> <dd pn="section-4.3-11.2"> <dl newline="false" spacing="normal" pn="section-4.3-11.2.1"> <dt pn="section-4.3-11.2.1.1">0:</dt> <dd pn="section-4.3-11.2.1.2">Inclusive List. Indicates that one or more link identifiers are included in the Link Set. Each identifies a separate link that is part of theset.</t> <t>1 - Inclusive Range indicatesset.</dd> <dt pn="section-4.3-11.2.1.3">1:</dt> <dd pn="section-4.3-11.2.1.4">Inclusive Range. Indicates that the Link Set defines a range of links. It contains two link identifiers. The first identifier indicates the start of the range (inclusive). The second identifier indicates the end of the range (inclusive). All links with numeric values between the bounds are considered to be part of the set. A value of zero in either position indicates that there is no bound on the corresponding portion of therange.</t> <t>2-255 - For future use</t> </list> </t> </list> </t> <t> IANA is to createrange.</dd> <dt pn="section-4.3-11.2.1.5">2-255:</dt> <dd pn="section-4.3-11.2.1.6">Unassigned.</dd> </dl> <t pn="section-4.3-11.2.2">IANA has created a new registry to manage the Action values of the Wavelength RestrictionConstraintTLV.</t><t><t pn="section-4.3-11.2.3"> If a PCE receives an unrecognized Action value, the PCEMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> send aPCErrPCEP Error (PCErr) message with a PCEP-ERRORObject (Error-Type=TBD8)object with Error-Type=27 and anError-value (Error-value=3).Error-value=3. See <xreftarget="sect-5.2"/>target="sect-5.2" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 5.2"/> for details.</t><t><t pn="section-4.3-11.2.4"> Note that "links" are assumed to be bidirectional.</t><t><list style="symbols"><t>Count</dd> <dt pn="section-4.3-11.3">Count (8bits): Thebits):</dt> <dd pn="section-4.3-11.4"> <t pn="section-4.3-11.4.1">The number of the linkidentifiers</t> </list> </t> <t>identifiers.</t> <t pn="section-4.3-11.4.2"> Note that a PCCMAY<bcp14>MAY</bcp14> add a Wavelength restriction that applies to all links by setting the Count field to zero and specifying just a set of wavelengths.</t><t><t pn="section-4.3-11.4.3"> Note that all link identifiers in the same listMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> be of the same type.</t><t><list style="hanging" hangIndent="3"> <t hangText="Reserved</dd> <dt pn="section-4.3-11.5">Reserved (16bits):">bits):</dt> <dd pn="section-4.3-11.6"> Reserved for future use andSHOULD<bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> be zeroed and ignored on receipt.</t> <t hangText="Link Identifiers:"></dd> <dt pn="section-4.3-11.7">Link Identifiers:</dt> <dd pn="section-4.3-11.8"> Identifies each link ID for which restriction is applied. The length is dependent on the link format and the Count field. See <xreftarget="sect-4.3.1"/>.target="sect-4.3.1" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 4.3.1"/> for encoding of the Link Identifierencoding. </t> <t hangText="Wavelength Restriction:">field. </dd> <dt pn="section-4.3-11.9">Wavelength Constraint:</dt> <dd pn="section-4.3-11.10"> SeeSection 4.3.2.<xref target="sect-4.3.2" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 4.3.2"/> for the encoding of the WavelengthRestriction Field encoding. </t> </list> </t> <t>Constraint field. </dd> </dl> <t pn="section-4.3-12"> Various encoding errors are possible with this TLV (e.g., not exactly two link identifiers with the range case, unknown identifier types, no matching link for a given identifier, etc.). To indicate errors associated with this encoding, a PCEP speakerMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> send a PCErr message withError-Type=TBD8Error-Type=27 and Error-value=3. See <xreftarget="sect-5.1"/>target="sect-5.2" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 5.2"/> forthedetails.</t> <sectiontitle="Linkanchor="sect-4.3.1" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-4.3.1"> <name slugifiedName="name-link-identifier-field">Link IdentifierField" anchor="sect-4.3.1"><t>Field</name> <t pn="section-4.3.1-1"> Thelink identifierLink Identifier field can be an IPv4 <xreftarget="RFC3630"/>,target="RFC3630" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC3630"/>, IPv6 <xreftarget="RFC5329"/>target="RFC5329" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC5329"/>, or unnumbered interface ID <xreftarget="RFC4203"/>.</t> <figure><artwork><![CDATA[ <Link Identifier>target="RFC4203" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC4203"/>.</t> <sourcecode type="rbnf" markers="false" pn="section-4.3.1-2"> <Link Identifier> ::=<IPv4 Address><IPv4 Address> |<IPv6 Address><IPv6 Address> |<Unnumbered<Unnumbered IFID> ]]></artwork> </figure> <t>TheID> </sourcecode> <t pn="section-4.3.1-3">The encoding of each case is asfollows:</t> <figure><artwork><![CDATA[ IPv4follows.</t> <figure anchor="fig-4.3.1-1" align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="figure-5"> <name slugifiedName="name-ipv4-address-field">IPv4 AddressFieldField</name> <artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt="" pn="section-4.3.1-4.1"> 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type = 1 | Reserved (24 bits) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | IPv4 address (4 bytes) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+IPv6</artwork> </figure> <figure anchor="fig-4.3.1-2" align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="figure-6"> <name slugifiedName="name-ipv6-address-field">IPv6 AddressFieldField</name> <artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt="" pn="section-4.3.1-5.1"> 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type = 2 | Reserved (24 bits) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | IPv6 address (16 bytes) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | IPv6 address (continued) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | IPv6 address (continued) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | IPv6 address (continued) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+Unnumbered</artwork> </figure> <figure anchor="fig-4.3.1-3" align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="figure-7"> <name slugifiedName="name-unnumbered-interface-id-add">Unnumbered Interface ID AddressFieldField</name> <artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt="" pn="section-4.3.1-6.1"> 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type = 3 | Reserved (24 bits) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | TE Node ID (32 bits) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Interface ID (32 bits) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+]]></artwork></artwork> </figure><t><list style="hanging" hangIndent="3"> <t hangText="Type<dl newline="false" spacing="normal" indent="3" pn="section-4.3.1-7"> <dt pn="section-4.3.1-7.1">Type (8bits):"> It indicatesbits):</dt> <dd pn="section-4.3.1-7.2"> Indicates the type of the linkidentifier.</t> <t hangText="Reservedidentifier.</dd> <dt pn="section-4.3.1-7.3">Reserved (24bits):"> Reservedbits):</dt> <dd pn="section-4.3.1-7.4">Reserved for future use andSHOULD<bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> be zeroed and ignored onreceipt.</t> <t hangText="Link Identifier:"> Whenreceipt.</dd> <dt pn="section-4.3.1-7.5">Link Identifier:</dt> <dd pn="section-4.3.1-7.6">When the Type field is 1,4-bytesa 4-byte IPv4 address is encoded; when the Type field is 2,16-bytesa 16-byte IPv6 address is encoded; and when the Type field is 3, a tuple of4-bytesa 4-byte TE node ID and4-bytesa 4-byte interface ID isencoded.</t> </list> </t> <t>encoded.</dd> </dl> <t pn="section-4.3.1-8"> The Type field is extensible and matchestotheIANA"TE_LINK Object Class type name space (Value 11)" registry created for the Link Management Protocol (LMP) <xreftarget="RFC4204"/> for "TE Link Object Class Type name space": <eref target="https://www.iana.org/assignments/lmp-parameters/lmp-parameters.xhtml#lmp-parameters-15."/> Seetarget="RFC4204" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC4204"/> (see <xreftarget="sect-8.14"/> for the request to update thetarget="LMP-PARAM" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="LMP-PARAM"/>). IANA has added an introductorytext ofnote before the aforementioned registryto notestating that the values have additional usage for the Link Identifier Typefield.</t>field. See <xref target="sect-8.14" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 8.14"/>.</t> </section> <sectiontitle="Wavelength Restriction Field" anchor="sect-4.3.2"><t>anchor="sect-4.3.2" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-4.3.2"> <name slugifiedName="name-wavelength-constraint-field">Wavelength Constraint Field</name> <t pn="section-4.3.2-1"> The WavelengthRestriction FieldConstraint field of the Wavelength RestrictionConstraintTLV is encoded as a Label SetfieldField as specified inSection 2.6 in<xreftarget="RFC7579"/>target="RFC7579" sectionFormat="of" section="2.6" format="default" derivedLink="https://rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7579#section-2.6" derivedContent="RFC7579"/> with the base label encoded as a32 bit32-bit LSC label, as defined in <xreftarget="RFC6205"/>.target="RFC6205" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6205"/>. The Label Set format is repeated here for convenience, with the base label internal structure included. See <xreftarget="RFC6205"/>target="RFC6205" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC6205"/> for a description of Grid,C.S, IdentifierChannel Spacing (C.S.), Identifier, and n,as well asand see <xreftarget="RFC7579"/>target="RFC7579" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC7579"/> for the details of each action.</t><figure><artwork><![CDATA[<figure anchor="fig-7.1" align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="figure-8"> <name slugifiedName="name-wavelength-constraint-field-2">Wavelength Constraint Field</name> <artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt="" pn="section-4.3.2-2.1"> 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Action| Num Labels | Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |Grid |C.SC.S. | Identifier | n | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Additional fields as necessary per action | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+]]></artwork></artwork> </figure><t> Action<dl newline="true" spacing="normal" pn="section-4.3.2-3"> <dt pn="section-4.3.2-3.1">Action (4bits): <list> <t>0 - Inclusive List</t> <t>1 - Exclusive List</t> <t>2 - Inclusive Range</t> <t>3 - Exclusive Range</t> <t>4 - Bitmap Set</t> </list> <list style="hanging" hangIndent="3"> <t hangText="Numbits):</dt> <dd pn="section-4.3.2-3.2"> <dl newline="false" spacing="normal" pn="section-4.3.2-3.2.1"> <dt pn="section-4.3.2-3.2.1.1">0:</dt> <dd pn="section-4.3.2-3.2.1.2">Inclusive List</dd> <dt pn="section-4.3.2-3.2.1.3">1:</dt> <dd pn="section-4.3.2-3.2.1.4">Exclusive List</dd> <dt pn="section-4.3.2-3.2.1.5">2:</dt> <dd pn="section-4.3.2-3.2.1.6">Inclusive Range</dd> <dt pn="section-4.3.2-3.2.1.7">3:</dt> <dd pn="section-4.3.2-3.2.1.8">Exclusive Range</dd> <dt pn="section-4.3.2-3.2.1.9">4:</dt> <dd pn="section-4.3.2-3.2.1.10">Bitmap Set</dd> </dl> </dd> <dt pn="section-4.3.2-3.3">Num Labels (12bits):">bits):</dt> <dd pn="section-4.3.2-3.4"> It is generally the number of labels. It has a specific meaning depending on the actionvalue.</t> <t hangText="Lengthvalue.</dd> <dt pn="section-4.3.2-3.5">Length (16bits):">bits):</dt> <dd pn="section-4.3.2-3.6"> It is the length in bytes of the entire WavelengthRestriction field.</t> <t hangText="IdentifierConstraint field.</dd> <dt pn="section-4.3.2-3.7">Identifier (9bits):">bits):</dt> <dd pn="section-4.3.2-3.8"> The Identifier is always set to 0. If PCC receives the value of the identifier other than 0, it willignore.</t> </list> </t> <t>ignore.</dd> </dl> <t pn="section-4.3.2-4"> See Sections2.6.1 - 2.6.3 of<xreftarget="RFC7579"/>target="RFC7579" section="2.6.1" sectionFormat="bare" format="default" derivedLink="https://rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7579#section-2.6.1" derivedContent="RFC7579"/>-<xref target="RFC7579" section="2.6.3" sectionFormat="bare" format="default" derivedLink="https://rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7579#section-2.6.3" derivedContent="RFC7579"/> of <xref target="RFC7579" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC7579"/> for details on additional field discussion for each action.</t> </section> </section> <sectiontitle="Signalanchor="sect-4.4" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-4.4"> <name slugifiedName="name-signal-processing-capabilit">Signal Processing CapabilityRestrictions" anchor="sect-4.4"><t>Restrictions</name> <t pn="section-4.4-1"> Path computation for WSON includes the checking of signal processing capabilities at each interface against requested capability; the PCEMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> have mechanisms to know the signal processing capabilities at each interface,e.g.e.g., by means ofthe Traffic Engineering Database(TED)eithervia either IGP orNetwork Management System (NMS).NMS. Moreover, a PCC should be able to indicate additional restrictions to signal processing compatibility,eitheron either the endpoint or any given link.</t><t><t pn="section-4.4-2"> The supported signal processing capabilities considered in the RWA Information Model <xreftarget="RFC7446"/>target="RFC7446" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC7446"/> are:<list style="symbols"> <t>Optical</t> <ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-4.4-3"> <li pn="section-4.4-3.1">Optical Interface ClassList</t> <t>Bit Rate</t> <t>Client Signal</t> </list> </t> <t>List</li> <li pn="section-4.4-3.2">Bit Rate</li> <li pn="section-4.4-3.3">Client Signal</li> </ul> <t pn="section-4.4-4"> TheBit Ratebit rate restriction is already expressed in<xref target="PCEP-GMPLS"/> inthe BANDWIDTHobject.</t> <t>object in <xref target="RFC8779" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC8779"/>.</t> <t pn="section-4.4-5"> In order to support theOptical Interface Classoptical interface class information and theClient Signal informationclient signal information, new TLVs are introduced asendpoint-restrictionendpoint restrictions in the END-POINTS type Generalizedendpoint: <list style="symbols"> <t>ClientEndpoint: </t> <ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-4.4-6"> <li pn="section-4.4-6.1">Client SignalTLV</t> <t>OpticalInformation TLV</li> <li pn="section-4.4-6.2">Optical Interface Class ListTLV</t> </list> </t> <t>TLV</li> </ul> <t pn="section-4.4-7"> The END-POINTS typegeneralized endpointGeneralized Endpoint is extended as follows:</t><figure><artwork><![CDATA[ <endpoint-restriction><sourcecode type="rbnf" markers="false" pn="section-4.4-8"> <endpoint-restriction> ::=<LABEL-REQUEST> <label-restriction-list> <label-restriction-list><LABEL-REQUEST> <label-restriction-list> <label-restriction-list> ::=<label-restriction> [<label-restriction-list>] <label-restriction><label-restriction> [<label-restriction-list>] <label-restriction> ::=(<LABEL-SET>| [<Wavelength Restriction Constraint>] [<signal-compatibility-restriction>]) Where <signal-compatibility-restriction>(<LABEL-SET>| [<Wavelength Restriction>] [<signal-compatibility-restriction>]) </sourcecode> <t pn="section-4.4-9">Where:</t> <sourcecode type="rbnf" markers="false" pn="section-4.4-10"> <signal-compatibility-restriction> ::=[<Optical[<Optical Interface ClassList>] [<Client Signal>] ]]></artwork> </figure> <t>List>] [<Client Signal Information>] </sourcecode> <t pn="section-4.4-11"> The Wavelength RestrictionConstraintTLV is defined inSection 4.3.</t> <t><xref target="sect-4.3" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 4.3"/>.</t> <t pn="section-4.4-12"> A newTLV for theOptical Interface Class List TLV(TBD5)(Type 11) isdefined, anddefined; the encoding of the value part ofthe Optical Interface Class Listthis TLV is described inSection 4.1 of<xreftarget="RFC7581"/>.</t> <t>target="RFC7581" sectionFormat="of" section="4.1" format="default" derivedLink="https://rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7581#section-4.1" derivedContent="RFC7581"/>.</t> <t pn="section-4.4-13"> A newTLV for theClient Signal Information TLV(TBD6)(Type 12) isdefined, anddefined; the encoding of the value part ofthe Client Signal Informationthis TLV is described inSection 4.2 of<xreftarget="RFC7581"/>.</t>target="RFC7581" sectionFormat="of" section="4.2" format="default" derivedLink="https://rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7581#section-4.2" derivedContent="RFC7581"/>.</t> <sectiontitle="Signalanchor="sect-4.4.1" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-4.4.1"> <name slugifiedName="name-signal-processing-exclusion">Signal ProcessingExclusion" anchor="sect-4.4.1"><t>Exclusion</name> <t pn="section-4.4.1-1"> The PCC/PCE should be able to exclude particular types of signal processing along the path in order to handle client restriction or multi-domain path computation. <xreftarget="RFC5440"/>target="RFC5521" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC5521"/> defines how the Exclude Route Object (XRO) subobject is used. In thisdraft,document, we add two new XRO Signal Processing ExclusionSubobjects.</t> <t>subobjects.</t> <t pn="section-4.4.1-2"> The first XRO subobject type(TBD9)(8) is the Optical Interface ClassList FieldList, which is defined as follows:</t> <figuretitle="Opticalanchor="fig-5" align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="figure-9"> <name slugifiedName="name-optical-interface-class-lis">Optical Interface Class List XROSubobject" anchor="fig-5"><artwork><![CDATA[Subobject</name> <artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt="" pn="section-4.4.1-3.1"> 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |X|Type=TBD9Type=8 | Length | Reserved | Attribute | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ // Optical Interface Class List // +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+]]></artwork></artwork> </figure><t><t pn="section-4.4.1-4"> Refer to <xreftarget="RFC5521"/>target="RFC5521" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC5521"/> for thedefinitiondefinitions of X,LengthLength, and Attribute.</t><t> Type<dl newline="false" spacing="normal" pn="section-4.4.1-5"> <dt pn="section-4.4.1-5.1">Type (7bits): The Typebits):</dt> <dd pn="section-4.4.1-5.2">The type of the Signaling Processing ExclusionField. The TLV Type value (TBD9) is to be assigned by thefield. IANA has assigned value 8 for the Optical Interface Class List XROSubobject Type.</t> <t> Reservedsubobject type.</dd> <dt pn="section-4.4.1-5.3">Reserved bits (8bits)bits):</dt> <dd pn="section-4.4.1-5.4">These are for future use andSHOULD<bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> be zeroed and ignored onreceipt.</t> <t> The Attribute fieldreceipt.</dd> <dt pn="section-4.4.1-5.5">Attribute (8bits): <xref target="RFC5521"/>bits):</dt> <dd pn="section-4.4.1-5.6"> <xref target="RFC5521" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC5521"/> defines several Attribute values; the only permitted Attribute values for this field are 0 (Interface) or 1(Node).</t> <t> The Optical(Node).</dd> <dt pn="section-4.4.1-5.7">Optical Interface ClassListList:</dt> <dd pn="section-4.4.1-5.8">This field is encoded as described inSection 4.1 of<xreftarget="RFC7581"/>.</t> <t>target="RFC7581" sectionFormat="of" section="4.1" format="default" derivedLink="https://rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7581#section-4.1" derivedContent="RFC7581"/>.</dd> </dl> <t pn="section-4.4.1-6"> The second XRO subobject type(TBD10)(9) is the Client SignalInformationInformation, which is defined as follows:</t> <figuretitle="Clientanchor="fig-6" align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="figure-10"> <name slugifiedName="name-client-signal-information-x">Client Signal Information XROSubobject" anchor="fig-6"><artwork><![CDATA[Subobject</name> <artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt="" pn="section-4.4.1-7.1"> 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |X|Type=TBD10Type=9 | Length | Reserved | Attribute | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ // Client Signal Information // +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+]]></artwork></artwork> </figure><t><t pn="section-4.4.1-8"> Refer to <xreftarget="RFC5521"/>target="RFC5521" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC5521"/> for thedefinitiondefinitions of X,LengthLength, and Attribute.</t><t>Type<dl newline="false" spacing="normal" pn="section-4.4.1-9"> <dt pn="section-4.4.1-9.1">Type (7bits): The Typebits):</dt> <dd pn="section-4.4.1-9.2">The type of the Signaling Processing ExclusionField. The TLV Type value (TBD10) is to be assigned by thefield. IANA has assigned value 9 for the Client Signal Information XROSubobject Type.</t> <t>Reservedsubobject type.</dd> <dt pn="section-4.4.1-9.3">Reserved bits (8bits)bits):</dt> <dd pn="section-4.4.1-9.4">These are for future use andSHOULD<bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> be zeroed and ignored onreceipt.</t> <t>The Attribute fieldreceipt.</dd> <dt pn="section-4.4.1-9.5">Attribute (8bits): [RFC5521]bits):</dt> <dd pn="section-4.4.1-9.6"> <xref target="RFC5521" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC5521"/> defines several Attribute values; the only permitted Attribute values for this field are 0 (Interface) or 1(Node).</t> <t> The Client(Node).</dd> <dt pn="section-4.4.1-9.7">Client SignalInformationInformation:</dt> <dd pn="section-4.4.1-9.8">This field is encoded as described inSection 4.2 of<xreftarget="RFC7581"/>.</t> <t>target="RFC7581" sectionFormat="of" section="4.2" format="default" derivedLink="https://rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7581#section-4.2" derivedContent="RFC7581"/>.</dd> </dl> <t pn="section-4.4.1-10"> The XRO needs to support the new Signaling Processing Exclusion XROSubobjectsubobject types:</t><figure><artwork><![CDATA[ Type XRO Subobject Type TBD9 Optical<ul empty="true" bare="false" spacing="normal" pn="section-4.4.1-11"> <li pn="section-4.4.1-11.1"> <dl spacing="normal" newline="false" pn="section-4.4.1-11.1.1"> <dt pn="section-4.4.1-11.1.1.1">8:</dt> <dd pn="section-4.4.1-11.1.1.2">Optical Interface ClassList TBD10 ClientList</dd> <dt pn="section-4.4.1-11.1.1.3">9:</dt> <dd pn="section-4.4.1-11.1.1.4">Client SignalInformation ]]></artwork> </figure>Information</dd> </dl> </li> </ul> </section> <sectiontitle="Signalanchor="sect-4.4.2" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-4.4.2"> <name slugifiedName="name-signal-processing-inclusion">Signal ProcessingInclusion" anchor="sect-4.4.2"><t>Inclusion</name> <t pn="section-4.4.2-1"> Similar to the XRO subobject, the PCC/PCE should be able to include particular types of signal processing along the path in order to handle client restriction or multi-domain path computation. <xreftarget="RFC5440"/>target="RFC5440" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC5440"/> defines how the Include Route Object (IRO) subobject is used. In thisdraft,document, we add two new Signal Processing InclusionSubobjects.</t> <t>subobjects.</t> <t pn="section-4.4.2-2"> The IRO needs to support the new IROSubobjectsubobject types(TBD11(8 andTBD12)9) for the PCEP IRO object <xreftarget="RFC5440"/>:</t> <figure><artwork><![CDATA[ Type IRO Subobject Type TBD11 Opticaltarget="RFC5440" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC5440"/>:</t> <ul empty="true" bare="false" spacing="normal" pn="section-4.4.2-3"> <li pn="section-4.4.2-3.1"> <dl newline="false" spacing="normal" pn="section-4.4.2-3.1.1"> <dt pn="section-4.4.2-3.1.1.1">8:</dt> <dd pn="section-4.4.2-3.1.1.2">Optical Interface ClassList TBD12 ClientList</dd> <dt pn="section-4.4.2-3.1.1.3">9:</dt> <dd pn="section-4.4.2-3.1.1.4">Client SignalInformation ]]></artwork> </figure> <t>Information</dd> </dl> </li> </ul> <t pn="section-4.4.2-4"> The encoding of the Signal Processing Inclusion subobjects is similar to the process in <xreftarget="sect-4.4.1"/>target="sect-4.4.1" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 4.4.1"/> where the 'X' field is replaced with the 'L'field,field; all the other fieldsremainsremain the same. The 'L' field is described in <xreftarget="RFC3209"/>.</t>target="RFC3209" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC3209"/>.</t> </section> </section> </section> <sectiontitle="Encodinganchor="sect-5" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-5"> <name slugifiedName="name-encoding-of-an-rwa-path-rep">Encoding ofaan RWA PathReply" anchor="sect-5"><t>Reply</name> <t pn="section-5-1"> This section provides the encoding ofaan RWA Path Reply for a wavelength allocation request as discussed in <xreftarget="sect-4"/>.</t>target="sect-4" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 4"/>.</t> <sectiontitle="Wavelengthanchor="sect-5.1" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-5.1"> <name slugifiedName="name-wavelength-allocation-tlv">Wavelength AllocationTLV" anchor="sect-5.1"><t>TLV</name> <t pn="section-5.1-1"> Recall that wavelength allocation can be performed by the PCE bydifferent means:</t> <t><list style="format (%c)"> <t>Bymeansof Explicitof:</t> <ol spacing="normal" type="(%c)" start="1" pn="section-5.1-2"> <li pn="section-5.1-2.1" derivedCounter="(a)">Explicit Label Control (ELC) where the PCE allocates which label to use for each interface/node along thepath.</t> <t>By means of apath.</li> <li pn="section-5.1-2.2" derivedCounter="(b)">A Label Set where the PCE provides a range of potential labels toallocatebe allocated by each node along thepath.</t> </list> </t> <t>path.</li> </ol> <t pn="section-5.1-3"> Option (b) allows distributed label allocation (performed during signaling) to complete wavelength allocation.</t><t><t pn="section-5.1-4"> The type for the Wavelength Allocation TLVtypeisTBD4 (See10 (see <xreftarget="sect-8.4"/>).target="sect-8.4" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 8.4"/>). Note that this TLV is used for both (a) and(b).(b) above. The TLV data is defined as follows:</t> <figuretitle="Wavelengthanchor="fig-7.2" align="left" suppress-title="false" pn="figure-11"> <name slugifiedName="name-wavelength-allocation-tlv-e">Wavelength Allocation TLVEncoding" anchor="fig-7"><artwork><![CDATA[Encoding</name> <artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt="" pn="section-5.1-5.1"> 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Reserved |FlagFlags |M| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Link IdentifierField| // . . . // +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Allocated Wavelength(s) | // . . . . // +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+]]></artwork></artwork> </figure><t><list style="symbols"> <t>Reserved<dl newline="false" spacing="normal" pn="section-5.1-6"> <dt pn="section-5.1-6.1">Reserved (16bits): Reservedbits):</dt> <dd pn="section-5.1-6.2">Reserved for futureuse.</t> <t>Flagsuse.</dd> <dt pn="section-5.1-6.3">Flags field (16bits)</t> </list> </t> <t> Onebits):</dt> <dd pn="section-5.1-6.4"> <t pn="section-5.1-6.4.1">One flag bit is allocated asfollows: <list> <t>M (Mode): 1 bit</t> <t>0 indicatesfollows:</t> <dl newline="false" spacing="normal" pn="section-5.1-6.4.2"> <dt pn="section-5.1-6.4.2.1">M (1 bit):</dt> <dd pn="section-5.1-6.4.2.2"> <t pn="section-5.1-6.4.2.2.1">Wavelength Allocation Mode.</t> <dl newline="false" spacing="normal" pn="section-5.1-6.4.2.2.2"> <dt pn="section-5.1-6.4.2.2.2.1">0:</dt> <dd pn="section-5.1-6.4.2.2.2.2">Indicates the allocationis under Explicitrelies on the use of LabelControl.</t> <t>1 indicatesSets.</dd> <dt pn="section-5.1-6.4.2.2.2.3">1:</dt> <dd pn="section-5.1-6.4.2.2.2.4">Indicates the allocation isexpressed indone using Explicit LabelSets.</t> </list> </t> <t> IANA is to createControl.</dd> </dl> </dd> </dl> <t pn="section-5.1-6.4.3">IANA has created a new registry to manage theFlagFlags field(TBD14)of the Wavelength Allocation TLV.</t><t> Note that all link identifiers in the same list must be of the same type. <list style="hanging" hangIndent="3"> <t hangText="Link Identifier:"> Identifies</dd> <dt pn="section-5.1-6.5">Link Identifier:</dt> <dd pn="section-5.1-6.6">Identifies the interface to which the assignment wavelength(s) is applied. See <xreftarget="sect-4.3.1"/>.target="sect-4.3.1" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 4.3.1"/> for encoding of the Link Identifierencoding.</t> <t hangText="Allocated Wavelength(s):">field.</dd> <dt pn="section-5.1-6.7">Allocated Wavelength(s):</dt> <dd pn="section-5.1-6.8"> Indicates the allocated wavelength(s) to be associated with theLink Identifier.link identifier. See <xreftarget="sect-4.3.2"/>target="sect-4.3.2" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 4.3.2"/> for encodingdetails.</t> </list> </t> <t>details.</dd> </dl> <t pn="section-5.1-7"> This TLV is carried in a PCRep message as anattributeAttribute TLV <xreftarget="RFC5420"/>target="RFC5420" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC5420"/> in the Hop AttributeSubobjectssubobjects <xreftarget="RFC7570"/>target="RFC7570" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC7570"/> in theEROExplicit Route Object (ERO) <xreftarget="RFC5440"/>.</t>target="RFC5440" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC5440"/>.</t> </section> <sectiontitle="Error Indicator" anchor="sect-5.2"><t>anchor="sect-5.2" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-5.2"> <name slugifiedName="name-error-indicator">Error Indicator</name> <t pn="section-5.2-1"> To indicate errors associated with the RWA request, a newError Type (TBD8)Error-Type 27 (WSON RWA Error) and subsequenterror-valuesError-values are defined as follows for inclusion in the PCEP-ERRORObject:</t> <t> A new Error-Type (TBD8) and subsequent error-values are defined as follows: <list style="symbols"> <t>Error-Type=TBD8;object:</t> <ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-5.2-2"> <li pn="section-5.2-2.1">Error-Type=27; Error-value=1:ifIf a PCE receivesaan RWA request and the PCE is not capable of processing the request due to insufficient memory, the PCEMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> send a PCErr message with a PCEP-ERRORObject (Error-Type=TBD8)object with Error-Type=27 andan Error-value (Error- value=1).Error-value=1. The PCE stops processing the request. The corresponding RWA requestMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> becancelledcanceled at thePCC.</t> <t>Error-Type=TBD8;PCC.</li> <li pn="section-5.2-2.2">Error-Type=27; Error-value=2:ifIf a PCE receivesaan RWA request and the PCE is not capable of RWA computation, the PCEMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> send a PCErr message with a PCEP-ERRORObject (Error-Type=TBD8)object with Error-Type=27 andan Error-value (Error-value=2).Error-value=2. The PCE stops processing the request. The corresponding RWA computationMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> becancelledcanceled at thePCC.</t> <t>Error-Type=TBD8;PCC.</li> <li pn="section-5.2-2.3">Error-Type=27; Error-value=3:ifIf a PCE receivesaan RWA request and there are syntactical encoding errors (e.g., not exactly two link identifiers with the range case, unknown identifier types, no matching link for a given identifier, unknown Action value, etc.), the PCEMUST<bcp14>MUST</bcp14> send a PCErr message with aPCEP- ERROR Object (Error-Type=TBD8)PCEP-ERROR object with Error-Type=27 andan Error-value (Error- value=3).</t> </list> </t>Error-value=3.</li> </ul> </section> <sectiontitle="NO-PATH Indicator" anchor="sect-5.3"><t>anchor="sect-5.3" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-5.3"> <name slugifiedName="name-no-path-indicator">NO-PATH Indicator</name> <t pn="section-5.3-1"> To communicate the reason(s) for not being able to find RWA for the path request, the NO-PATH object can be used in the corresponding response. The format of the NO-PATH object body is defined in <xreftarget="RFC5440"/>.target="RFC5440" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC5440"/>. The object may contain a NO-PATH-VECTOR TLV to provide additional information about why a path computation has failed.</t><t> One<t pn="section-5.3-2"> This document defines a new bit flagis definedto be carried in the Flags field in the NO-PATH-VECTORTLVTLV, which is carried in the NO-PATHObject.</t> <t><list style="hanging" hangIndent="3"> <t hangText="Bit TBD7:">object:</t> <dl newline="false" spacing="normal" indent="3" pn="section-5.3-3"> <dt pn="section-5.3-3.1">Bit 23:</dt> <dd pn="section-5.3-3.2"> When set, the PCE indicates no feasible route was found that meets all the constraints (e.g., wavelength restriction, signal compatibility, etc.) associated with RWA.</t> </list> </t></dd> </dl> </section> </section> <sectiontitle="Manageability Considerations" anchor="sect-6"><t>anchor="sect-6" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-6"> <name slugifiedName="name-manageability-consideration">Manageability Considerations</name> <t pn="section-6-1"> Manageability of WSONRouting and Wavelength Assignment (RWA)RWA with PCE must address the considerations in the followingconsiderations:</t>subsections.</t> <sectiontitle="Controlanchor="sect-6.1" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-6.1"> <name slugifiedName="name-control-of-function-and-pol">Control of Function andPolicy" anchor="sect-6.1"><t>Policy</name> <t pn="section-6.1-1"> In addition to the parameters already listed inSection 8.1 of<xreftarget="RFC5440"/>,target="RFC5440" sectionFormat="of" section="8.1" format="default" derivedLink="https://rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5440#section-8.1" derivedContent="RFC5440"/>, a PCEP implementationSHOULD<bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> allow configuration of the following PCEP session parameters on a PCC:</t><t><list style="symbols"> <t>The<ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-6.1-2"> <li pn="section-6.1-2.1">The ability to send a WSON RWArequest.</t> </list> </t> <t>request.</li> </ul> <t pn="section-6.1-3"> In addition to the parameters already listed inSection 8.1 of<xreftarget="RFC5440"/>,target="RFC5440" sectionFormat="of" section="8.1" format="default" derivedLink="https://rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5440#section-8.1" derivedContent="RFC5440"/>, a PCEP implementationSHOULD<bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> allow configuration of the following PCEP session parameters on a PCE:</t><t><list style="symbols"> <t>The<ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-6.1-4"> <li pn="section-6.1-4.1">The support for WSONRWA.</t> <t>ARWA.</li> <li pn="section-6.1-4.2">A set ofWSON RWA specificWSON-RWA-specific policies (authorized sender, request rate limiter,etc).</t> </list> </t> <t>etc).</li> </ul> <t pn="section-6.1-5"> These parameters may be configured as default parameters for any PCEP session the PCEP speaker participates in, or they may apply to a specific session with a given PCEP peer or a specific group of sessions with a specific group of PCEP peers.</t> </section> <sectiontitle="Livenessanchor="sect-6.2" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-6.2"> <name slugifiedName="name-liveness-detection-and-moni">Liveness Detection andMonitoring" anchor="sect-6.2"><t>Monitoring</name> <t pn="section-6.2-1"> Mechanisms defined in this document do not imply any new liveness detection and monitoringrequirements in addition torequirements, aside from those already listed insection 8.3 of<xreftarget="RFC5440"/>.</t>target="RFC5440" sectionFormat="of" section="8.3" format="default" derivedLink="https://rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5440#section-8.3" derivedContent="RFC5440"/>.</t> </section> <sectiontitle="Verifyinganchor="sect-6.3" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-6.3"> <name slugifiedName="name-verifying-correct-operation">Verifying CorrectOperation" anchor="sect-6.3"><t>Operation</name> <t pn="section-6.3-1"> Mechanisms defined in this document do not imply any new verificationrequirements in addition torequirements, aside from those already listed insection 8.4 of<xreftarget="RFC5440"/></t>target="RFC5440" sectionFormat="of" section="8.4" format="default" derivedLink="https://rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5440#section-8.4" derivedContent="RFC5440"/>.</t> </section> <sectiontitle="Requirementsanchor="sect-6.4" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-6.4"> <name slugifiedName="name-requirements-on-other-proto">Requirements on Other Protocols and FunctionalComponents" anchor="sect-6.4"><t>Components</name> <t pn="section-6.4-1"> The PCEP Link-State mechanism <xreftarget="PCEP-LS"/>target="I-D.lee-pce-pcep-ls-optical" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="PCEP-LS"/> may be used to advertise WSON RWA path computation capabilities to PCCs.</t> </section> <sectiontitle="Impactanchor="sect-6.5" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-6.5"> <name slugifiedName="name-impact-on-network-operation">Impact on NetworkOperation" anchor="sect-6.5"><t>Operation</name> <t pn="section-6.5-1"> Mechanisms defined in this document do not imply any new network operationrequirements in addition torequirements, aside from those already listed insection 8.6 of<xreftarget="RFC5440"/>.</t>target="RFC5440" sectionFormat="of" section="8.6" format="default" derivedLink="https://rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5440#section-8.6" derivedContent="RFC5440"/>.</t> </section> </section> <sectiontitle="Security Considerations" anchor="sect-7"><t>anchor="sect-7" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-7"> <name slugifiedName="name-security-considerations">Security Considerations</name> <t pn="section-7-1"> The security considerations discussed in <xreftarget="RFC5440"/>target="RFC5440" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC5440"/> are relevant for thisdocument,document; this document does not introduce any new security issues. If an operator wishes to keepprivatethe information distributed byWSON,WSON private, PCEPS (Usage of TLS to Provide a Secure Transport for PCEP) <xreftarget="RFC8253"/> SHOULDtarget="RFC8253" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC8253"/> <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> be used.</t> </section> <sectiontitle="IANA Considerations" anchor="sect-8"><t>anchor="sect-8" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-8"> <name slugifiedName="name-iana-considerations">IANA Considerations</name> <t pn="section-8-1"> IANA maintains a registry of PCEP parameters. IANA has made allocations from thesub-registriessubregistries as described in the following sections.</t> <sectiontitle="Newanchor="sect-8.1" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-8.1"> <name slugifiedName="name-new-pcep-object-wavelength-">New PCEP Object: Wavelength AssignmentObject" anchor="sect-8.1"><t>Object</name> <t pn="section-8.1-1"> As described in <xreftarget="sect-4.1"/>,target="sect-4.1" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 4.1"/>, a new PCEPObjectobject is defined to carrywavelength assignment relatedwavelength-assignment-related constraints. IANAis to allocatehas allocated the followingfromin the "PCEP Objects"sub-registry (<eref target="http://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml#pcep-objects"/>):</t> <figure><artwork><![CDATA[ Object Class Name Object Reference Value Type --------------------------------------------------------- TBD1 WA 1:subregistry <xref target="PCEP-NUMBERS" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="PCEP-NUMBERS"/>:</t> <table align="left" pn="table-1"> <thead> <tr> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Object-Class Value</th> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Name</th> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Object-Type</th> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Reference</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">42</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">WA</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">0: Reserved</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8780</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1"/> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1"/> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">1: WavelengthAssignment [This.I-D] ]]></artwork> </figure>Assignment</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8780</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> </section> <sectiontitle="WAanchor="sect-8.2" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-8.2"> <name slugifiedName="name-wa-object-flag-field">WA Object FlagField" anchor="sect-8.2"><t>Field</name> <t pn="section-8.2-1"> As described in <xreftarget="sect-4.1"/>,target="sect-4.1" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 4.1"/>, IANAis to create ahas created the "WA Object Flag Field" subregistry under the "Path Computation Element Protocol (PCEP) Numbers" registry <xref target="PCEP-NUMBERS" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="PCEP-NUMBERS"/> to manage theFlagFlags field of the WA object. New values are to be assigned by Standards Action <xreftarget="RFC8126"/>.target="RFC8126" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC8126"/>. Each bit should be tracked with the following qualities:</t><t><list style="symbols"> <t>Bit<ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-8.2-2"> <li pn="section-8.2-2.1">Bit number (counting from bit 0 as the most significantbit)</t> <t>Capability description</t> <t>Defining RFC</t> </list> </t> <t> The following values are defined inbit)</li> <li pn="section-8.2-2.2">Capability description</li> <li pn="section-8.2-2.3">Defining RFC</li> </ul> <t pn="section-8.2-3">The initial contents of thisdocument:</t> <t>registry are shown below. One bitis definedhas been allocated for theWA Objectflag defined in this document:</t><t> Codespace of the Flag field (WA Object)</t> <figure><artwork><![CDATA[ Bit Description Reference ------------------------------------------------- 0-14 Unassigned [This.I-D] 15 Explicit Label Control [This.I-D] ]]></artwork> </figure><table align="left" pn="table-2"> <thead> <tr> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Bit</th> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Description</th> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Reference</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">0-14</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Unassigned</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1"/> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">15</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Wavelength Allocation Mode</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8780</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> </section> <sectiontitle="Newanchor="sect-8.3" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-8.3"> <name slugifiedName="name-new-pcep-tlv-wavelength-sel">New PCEP TLV: Wavelength SelectionTLV" anchor="sect-8.3"><t> As described inTLV</name> <t pn="section-8.3-1"> In <xreftarget="sect-4.2"/>,target="sect-4.2" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 4.2"/>, a new PCEP TLV is defined to indicate wavelength selection constraints. IANAis to allocate this new TLV fromhas made the following allocation in the "PCEP TLV Type Indicators" subregistry(<eref target="http://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml#pcep-tlv-type-indicators"/>).</t> <figure><artwork><![CDATA[ Value Description Reference --------------------------------------------------------- TBD2 Wavelength Selection [This.I-D] ]]></artwork> </figure><xref target="PCEP-NUMBERS" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="PCEP-NUMBERS"/>:</t> <table align="left" pn="table-3"> <thead> <tr> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Value</th> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Description</th> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Reference</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">8</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Wavelength Selection</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8780</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> </section> <sectiontitle="Newanchor="sect-8.4" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-8.4"> <name slugifiedName="name-new-pcep-tlv-wavelength-res">New PCEP TLV: Wavelength RestrictionConstraint TLV" anchor="sect-8.4"><t> As described inTLV</name> <t pn="section-8.4-1"> In <xreftarget="sect-4.3"/>,target="sect-4.3" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 4.3"/>, a new PCEP TLV is defined to indicate wavelengthrestriction constraints.restrictions. IANAis to allocate this new TLV fromhas made the following allocation in the "PCEP TLV Type Indicators" subregistry(<eref target="http://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml#pcep-tlv-type-indicators"/>).<xref target="PCEP-NUMBERS" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="PCEP-NUMBERS"/>: </t><figure><artwork><![CDATA[ Value Description Reference --------------------------------------------------------- TBD3 Wavelength Restriction [This.I-D] Constraint ]]></artwork> </figure><table align="left" pn="table-4"> <thead> <tr> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Value</th> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Description</th> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Reference</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">9</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Wavelength Restriction</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8780</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> </section> <sectiontitle="Wavelengthanchor="sect-8.5" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-8.5"> <name slugifiedName="name-wavelength-restriction-tlv-a">Wavelength RestrictionConstraintTLV ActionValues" anchor="sect-8.5"><t>Values</name> <t pn="section-8.5-1"> As described in <xreftarget="sect-4.3"/>,target="sect-4.3" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 4.3"/>, IANAis to allocate ahas created the new "Wavelength Restriction TLV Action Values" subregistry under the "Path Computation Element Protocol (PCEP) Numbers" registry <xref target="PCEP-NUMBERS" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="PCEP-NUMBERS"/> to manage the Action values of the Action fieldinof the Wavelength RestrictionConstraintTLV. New values are assigned by Standards Action <xreftarget="RFC8126"/>.target="RFC8126" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC8126"/>. Each value should be tracked with the following qualities:value, meaning, and defining RFC. The following values are defined in</t> <ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-8.5-2"> <li pn="section-8.5-2.1">Value</li> <li pn="section-8.5-2.2">Meaning</li> <li pn="section-8.5-2.3">Defining RFC</li> </ul> <t pn="section-8.5-3">The initial contents of thisdocument:</t> <figure><artwork><![CDATA[ Value Meaning Reference --------------------------------------------------------- 0 Inclusive List [This.I-D] 1 Inclusive Range [This.I-D] 2-255 Reserved [This.I-D] ]]></artwork> </figure>registry are shown below:</t> <table align="left" pn="table-5"> <thead> <tr> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Value</th> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Meaning</th> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Reference</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">0</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Inclusive List</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8780</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">1</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Inclusive Range</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8780</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">2-255</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Unassigned</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1"/> </tr> </tbody> </table> </section> <sectiontitle="Newanchor="sect-8.6" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-8.6"> <name slugifiedName="name-new-pcep-tlv-wavelength-all">New PCEP TLV: Wavelength AllocationTLV" anchor="sect-8.6"><t> As described inTLV</name> <t pn="section-8.6-1"> In <xreftarget="sect-5.1"/>,target="sect-5.1" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 5.1"/>, a new PCEP TLV is defined to indicate the allocation of the wavelength(s) by the PCE in response to a request by the PCC. IANAis to allocate this new TLV fromhas made the following allocation in "PCEP TLV Type Indicators" subregistry(<eref target="http://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml#pcep-tlv-type-indicators"/>).<xref target="PCEP-NUMBERS" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="PCEP-NUMBERS"/>: </t><figure><artwork><![CDATA[ Value Description Reference --------------------------------------------------------- TBD4 Wavelength Allocation [This.I-D] ]]></artwork> </figure><table align="left" pn="table-6"> <thead> <tr> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Value</th> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Description</th> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Reference</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">10</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Wavelength Allocation</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8780</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> </section> <sectiontitle="Wavelengthanchor="sect-8.7" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-8.7"> <name slugifiedName="name-wavelength-allocation-tlv-f">Wavelength Allocation TLV FlagField" anchor="sect-8.7"><t>Field</name> <t pn="section-8.7-1"> As described in <xreftarget="sect-5.1"/>,target="sect-5.1" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 5.1"/>, IANAis to allocatehas created aregistrynew "Wavelength Allocation TLV Flag Field" subregistry under the "Path Computation Element Protocol (PCEP) Numbers" registry <xref target="PCEP-NUMBERS" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="PCEP-NUMBERS"/> to manage theFlagFlags field of the Wavelength Allocation TLV. New values are to be assigned by Standards Action <xreftarget="RFC8126"/>.target="RFC8126" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC8126"/>. Each bit should be tracked with the following qualities:</t><t><list style="symbols"> <t>Bit<ul spacing="normal" bare="false" empty="false" pn="section-8.7-2"> <li pn="section-8.7-2.1">Bit number (counting from bit 0 as the most significantbit)</t> <t>Capability description</t> <t>Defining RFC</t> </list> </t> <t> Onebit)</li> <li pn="section-8.7-2.2">Capability description</li> <li pn="section-8.7-2.3">Defining RFC</li> </ul> <t pn="section-8.7-3">One bit is defined for theWavelength Allocationflag defined in this- document:</t> <t> Codespacedocument. The initial contents ofthe Flag field (Wavelength Allocation TLV)</t> <figure><artwork><![CDATA[ Bit Description Reference ------------------------------------------------- 0-14 Unassigned [This.I-D] 15 Wavelengththis registry are shown below:</t> <table align="left" pn="table-7"> <thead> <tr> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Bit</th> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Description</th> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Reference</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">0-14</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Unassigned</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1"/> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">15</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Wavelength AllocationMode [This.I-D] ]]></artwork> </figure>Mode</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8780</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> </section> <sectiontitle="Newanchor="sect-8.8" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-8.8"> <name slugifiedName="name-new-pcep-tlv-optical-interf">New PCEP TLV: Optical Interface Class ListTLV" anchor="sect-8.8"><t> As described inTLV</name> <t pn="section-8.8-1"> In <xreftarget="sect-4.4"/>,target="sect-4.4" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 4.4"/>, a new PCEP TLV is defined to indicate theoptical interface class list.Optical Interface Class List. IANAis to allocate this new TLV fromhas made the following allocation in the "PCEP TLV Type Indicators" subregistry(<eref target="http://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml#pcep-tlv-type-indicators"/>).<xref target="PCEP-NUMBERS" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="PCEP-NUMBERS"/>: </t><figure><artwork><![CDATA[ Value Description Reference --------------------------------------------------------- TBD5 Optical<table align="left" pn="table-8"> <thead> <tr> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Value</th> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Description</th> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Reference</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">11</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Optical Interface[This.I-D]ClassList ]]></artwork> </figure>List</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8780</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> </section> <sectiontitle="Newanchor="sect-8.9" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-8.9"> <name slugifiedName="name-new-pcep-tlv-client-signal-">New PCEP TLV: Client SignalTLV" anchor="sect-8.9"><t> As described inInformation TLV</name> <t pn="section-8.9-1"> In <xreftarget="sect-4.4"/>,target="sect-4.4" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 4.4"/>, a new PCEP TLV is defined to indicate theclient signal information.Client Signal Information. IANAis to allocate this new TLV fromhas made the following allocation in the "PCEP TLV Type Indicators" subregistry(<eref target="http://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml#pcep-tlv-type-indicators"/>).<xref target="PCEP-NUMBERS" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="PCEP-NUMBERS"/>: </t><figure><artwork><![CDATA[ Value Description Reference --------------------------------------------------------- TBD6 Client<table align="left" pn="table-9"> <thead> <tr> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Value</th> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Description</th> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Reference</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">12</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Client SignalInformation [This.I-D] ]]></artwork> </figure>Information</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8780</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> </section> <sectiontitle="New No-Path Reasons" anchor="sect-8.10"><t> As described inanchor="sect-8.10" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-8.10"> <name slugifiedName="name-new-bit-flag-for-no-path-ve">New Bit Flag for NO-PATH-VECTOR TLV</name> <t pn="section-8.10-1"> In <xreftarget="sect-5.3"/>,target="sect-5.3" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 5.3"/>, a new bit flagareis defined to be carried in the Flags field in the NO-PATH-VECTORTLVTLV, which is carried in the NO-PATHObject.object. This flag, when set, indicates that no feasible route was found that meets all the RWA constraints (e.g., wavelength restriction, signal compatibility, etc.) associated withaan RWA path computation request.</t><t><t pn="section-8.10-2"> IANAis to allocatehas made the following allocation for this new bit flagfromin the"PCEP NO-PATH-VECTOR"NO-PATH-VECTOR TLV Flag Field" subregistry(<eref target="http://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml#no-path-vector-tlv"/>).</t> <figure><artwork><![CDATA[ Bit Description Reference ----------------------------------------------------- TBD7 No<xref target="PCEP-NUMBERS" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="PCEP-NUMBERS"/>: </t> <table align="left" pn="table-10"> <thead> <tr> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Bit</th> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Description</th> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Reference</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">23</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">No RWA constraintsmet [This.I-D] ]]></artwork> </figure>met</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8780</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> </section> <sectiontitle="Newanchor="sect-8.11" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-8.11"> <name slugifiedName="name-new-error-types-and-error-v">New Error-Types andError-Values" anchor="sect-8.11"><t> As described inError-Values</name> <t pn="section-8.11-1"> In <xreftarget="sect-5.2"/>,target="sect-5.2" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 5.2"/>, new PCEP error codes are defined for WSON RWA errors. IANAis to allocate fromhas made the following allocations in the""PCEP-ERROR"PCEP-ERROR Object Error Types and Values"sub-registry (<eref target="http://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml#pcep-error-object"/>).</t> <figure><artwork><![CDATA[ Error- Meaning Error-Value Reference Type --------------------------------------------------------------- TBD8 WSONsubregistry <xref target="PCEP-NUMBERS" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="PCEP-NUMBERS"/>:</t> <table align="left" pn="table-11"> <thead> <tr> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Error-Type</th> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Meaning</th> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Error-value</th> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Reference</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">27</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">WSON RWAError 0: Unassigned [This.I-D] 1:error</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">0: Unassigned</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8780</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1"/> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1"/> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">1: Insufficient[This.I-D] Memory 2:memory</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8780</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1"/> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1"/> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">2: RWA computation[This.I-D] Not supported 3:not supported</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8780</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1"/> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1"/> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">3: Syntactical[This.I-D] Encoding error 4-255: Unassigned [This.I-D] ]]></artwork> </figure>encoding error</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8780</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1"/> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1"/> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">4-255: Unassigned</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8780</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> </section> <sectiontitle="Newanchor="sect-8.12" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-8.12"> <name slugifiedName="name-new-subobjects-for-the-excl">New Subobjects for the Exclude RouteObject" anchor="sect-8.12"><t> As described in <xref target="sect-4.4.1"/>, the "PCEP Parameters"Object</name> <t pn="section-8.12-1">The "Path Computation Element Protocol (PCEP) Numbers" registry contains a subregistry"PCEP Objects" with an entry for the Exclude Route Object (XRO).titled "XRO Subobjects" <xref target="PCEP-NUMBERS" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="PCEP-NUMBERS"/>. Per <xref target="sect-4.4.1" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 4.4.1"/>, IANAis requested to add furtherhas added the following subobjects that can be carried in theXRO as follows:</t> <figure><artwork><![CDATA[ Subobject Type Reference ---------------------------------------------------------- TBD9 OpticalXRO:</t> <table align="left" pn="table-12"> <thead> <tr> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Value</th> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Description</th> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Reference</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">8</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Optical Interface ClassList [This.I-D] TBD10 ClientList</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8780</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">9</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Client SignalInformation [This.I-D] ]]></artwork> </figure>Information</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8780</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> </section> <sectiontitle="Newanchor="sect-8.13" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-8.13"> <name slugifiedName="name-new-subobjects-for-the-incl">New Subobjects for the Include RouteObject" anchor="sect-8.13"><t> As described in <xref target="sect-4.4.2"/>, the "PCEP Parameters"Object</name> <t pn="section-8.13-1"> The "Path Computation Element Protocol (PCEP) Numbers" registry contains a subregistry"PCEP Objects" with an entry for the Include Route Object (IRO).titled "IRO Subobjects" <xref target="PCEP-NUMBERS" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="PCEP-NUMBERS"/>. Per <xref target="sect-4.4.2" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 4.4.2"/>, IANAis requested to add furtherhas added the following subobjects that can be carried in theIRO as follows:</t> <figure><artwork><![CDATA[ Subobject Type Reference ---------------------------------------------------------- TBD11 OpticalIRO:</t> <table align="left" pn="table-13"> <thead> <tr> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Value</th> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Description</th> <th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Reference</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">8</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Optical Interface ClassList [This.I-D] TBD12 ClientList</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8780</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">9</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">Client SignalInformation [This.I-D] ]]></artwork> </figure>Information</td> <td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1">RFC 8780</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> </section> <sectiontitle="Requestanchor="sect-8.14" numbered="true" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-8.14"> <name slugifiedName="name-request-for-updated-note-fo">Request for Updated Note for LMP TE Link Object ClassType" anchor="sect-8.14"><t> As discussed in <xref target="sect-4.3.1"/>, theType</name> <t pn="section-8.14-1"> The "TE_LINK Object Class type name space (Value 11)" registry was created for the Link Management Protocol (LMP) <xreftarget="RFC4204"/> for "TE Linktarget="RFC4204" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="RFC4204"/>. As discussed in <xref target="sect-4.3.1" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="Section 4.3.1"/>, IANA has added the following note at the top of the "TE_LINK Object ClassTypetype namespace": <eref target="https://www.iana.org/assignments/lmp-parameters/lmp-parameters.xhtml#lmp-parameters-15"/> is requested for the updated introductory note that thespace (Value 11)" registry <xref target="LMP-PARAM" format="default" sectionFormat="of" derivedContent="LMP-PARAM"/>: </t> <ul empty="true" bare="false" spacing="normal" pn="section-8.14-2"> <li pn="section-8.14-2.1"> These values have additional usage for the Link Identifier Typefield.</t> </section>field. </li> </ul> </section><section title="Acknowledgments" anchor="sect-9"><t> The authors would like to thank Adrian Farrel, Julien Meuric, Dhruv Dhody and Benjamin Kaduk for many helpful comments that greatly improved the contents of this draft.</t></section> </middle> <back> <displayreference target="I-D.lee-pce-pcep-ls-optical" to="PCEP-LS"/> <references pn="section-9"> <name slugifiedName="name-references">References</name> <referencestitle="Normative References"> &RFC2119; &RFC3209; &RFC3630; &RFC5329; &RFC5440; &RFC6205; &RFC7570; &RFC7579; &RFC7581; &RFC7689; &RFC7688; &RFC8174; &RFC8253;pn="section-9.1"> <name slugifiedName="name-normative-references">Normative References</name> <referenceanchor='PCEP-GMPLS'>anchor="RFC2119" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC2119"> <front><title>PCEP extensions<title>Key words forGMPLS</title>use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels</title> <author initials="S." surname="Bradner" fullname="S. Bradner"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <date year="1997" month="March"/> <abstract> <t>In many standards track documents several words are used to signify the requirements in the specification. These words are often capitalized. This document defines these words as they should be interpreted in IETF documents. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.</t> </abstract> </front> <seriesInfo name="BCP" value="14"/> <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="2119"/> <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC2119"/> </reference> <reference anchor="RFC3209" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3209" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC3209"> <front> <title>RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP Tunnels</title> <authorinitials='C' surname='Margaria' fullname='Cyril Margaria'>initials="D." surname="Awduche" fullname="D. Awduche"> <organization/>showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <authorinitials='O' surname='Dios' fullname='Oscar de Dios'>initials="L." surname="Berger" fullname="L. Berger"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="D." surname="Gan" fullname="D. Gan"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="T." surname="Li" fullname="T. Li"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="V." surname="Srinivasan" fullname="V. Srinivasan"> <organization/>showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <authorinitials='F' surname='Zhang' fullname='Fatai Zhang'>initials="G." surname="Swallow" fullname="G. Swallow"> <organization/>showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <datemonth='December' day='12' year='2019' /> <abstract><t>A Path Computation Element (PCE) provides path computation functions for Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) and Generalizedyear="2001" month="December"/> <abstract> <t>This document describes the use of RSVP (Resource Reservation Protocol), including all the necessary extensions, to establish label-switched paths (LSPs) in MPLS(GMPLS) networks. Additional requirements for GMPLS are(Multi-Protocol Label Switching). Since the flow along an LSP is completely identifiedin RFC7025. This memo provides extensions toby thePath Computation Element communication Protocol (PCEP) forlabel applied at thesupportingress node of theGMPLS control plane to address those requirements.</t></abstract>path, these paths may be treated as tunnels. A key application of LSP tunnels is traffic engineering with MPLS as specified in RFC 2702. [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t> </abstract> </front> <seriesInfoname='Work in Progress,' value='draft-ietf-pce-gmpls-pcep-extensions-16' />name="RFC" value="3209"/> <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC3209"/> </reference></references> <references title="Informative References"> &RFC3471; &RFC4203; &RFC4204; &RFC4655; &RFC5420; &RFC5521; &RFC6163; &RFC6566; &RFC7446; &RFC7449; &RFC8126;<referenceanchor='PCEP-LS'>anchor="RFC3630" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3630" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC3630"> <front><title>PCEP Extension for Distribution of Link-State and TE information for Optical Networks</title><title>Traffic Engineering (TE) Extensions to OSPF Version 2</title> <authorinitials='Y' surname='Lee' fullname='Young Lee'>initials="D." surname="Katz" fullname="D. Katz"> <organization/>showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <authorinitials='H' surname='Zheng' fullname='Haomian Zheng'>initials="K." surname="Kompella" fullname="K. Kompella"> <organization/>showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <authorinitials='D' surname='Ceccarelli' fullname='Daniele Ceccarelli'>initials="D." surname="Yeung" fullname="D. Yeung"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <date year="2003" month="September"/> <abstract> <t>This document describes extensions to the OSPF protocol version 2 to support intra-area Traffic Engineering (TE), using Opaque Link State Advertisements.</t> </abstract> </front> <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="3630"/> <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC3630"/> </reference> <reference anchor="RFC5329" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5329" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC5329"> <front> <title>Traffic Engineering Extensions to OSPF Version 3</title> <author initials="K." surname="Ishiguro" fullname="K. Ishiguro"> <organization/>showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <authorinitials='W' surname='Wang' fullname='Wei Wang'>initials="V." surname="Manral" fullname="V. Manral"> <organization/>showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <authorinitials='P' surname='Park' fullname='Peter Park'>initials="A." surname="Davey" fullname="A. Davey"> <organization/>showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <authorinitials='B' surname='Yoon' fullname='Bin-Yeong Yoon'>initials="A." surname="Lindem" fullname="A. Lindem" role="editor"> <organization/>showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <datemonth='September' day='2' year='2019' /> <abstract><t>In orderyear="2008" month="September"/> <abstract> <t>This document describes extensions tocompute and provide optimal paths, Path Computation Elements (PCEs) require an accurate and timelyOSPFv3 to support intra-area Traffic EngineeringDatabase (TED). Traditionally this Link State and(TE). This document extends OSPFv2 TEinformationto handle IPv6 networks. A new TLV and several new sub-TLVs are defined to support IPv6 networks. [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t> </abstract> </front> <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="5329"/> <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC5329"/> </reference> <reference anchor="RFC5440" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5440" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC5440"> <front> <title>Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication Protocol (PCEP)</title> <author initials="JP." surname="Vasseur" fullname="JP. Vasseur" role="editor"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="JL." surname="Le Roux" fullname="JL. Le Roux" role="editor"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <date year="2009" month="March"/> <abstract> <t>This document specifies the Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication Protocol (PCEP) for communications between a Path Computation Client (PCC) and a PCE, or between two PCEs. Such interactions include path computation requests and path computation replies as well as notifications of specific states related to the use of a PCE in the context of Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) and Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Traffic Engineering. PCEP is designed to be flexible and extensible so as to easily allow for the addition of further messages and objects, should further requirements be expressed in the future. [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t> </abstract> </front> <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="5440"/> <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC5440"/> </reference> <reference anchor="RFC6205" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6205" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC6205"> <front> <title>Generalized Labels for Lambda-Switch-Capable (LSC) Label Switching Routers</title> <author initials="T." surname="Otani" fullname="T. Otani" role="editor"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="D." surname="Li" fullname="D. Li" role="editor"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <date year="2011" month="March"/> <abstract> <t>Technology in the optical domain is constantly evolving, and, as a consequence, new equipment providing lambda switching capability has beenobtaineddeveloped and is currently being deployed.</t> <t>Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) is a family of protocols that can be used to operate networks built from alink state routing protocol (supporting traffic engineering extensions). Thisrange of technologies including wavelength (or lambda) switching. For this purpose, GMPLS defined a wavelength label as only having significance between two neighbors. Global wavelength semantics are not considered.</t> <t>In order to facilitate interoperability in a network composed of next generation lambda-switch-capable equipment, this documentextendsdefines a standard lambda label format that is compliant with the Dense Wavelength Division Multiplexing (DWDM) and Coarse Wavelength Division Multiplexing (CWDM) grids defined by the International Telecommunication Union Telecommunication Standardization Sector. The label format defined in this document can be used in GMPLS signaling and routing protocols. [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t> </abstract> </front> <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="6205"/> <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC6205"/> </reference> <reference anchor="RFC7570" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7570" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC7570"> <front> <title>Label Switched Path (LSP) Attribute in the Explicit Route Object (ERO)</title> <author initials="C." surname="Margaria" fullname="C. Margaria" role="editor"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="G." surname="Martinelli" fullname="G. Martinelli"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="S." surname="Balls" fullname="S. Balls"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="B." surname="Wright" fullname="B. Wright"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <date year="2015" month="July"/> <abstract> <t>RFC 5420 extends RSVP-TE to specify or record generic attributes that apply to the whole of the path of a Label Switched Path (LSP). This document defines an extension to the RSVP Explicit Route Object (ERO) and Record Route Object (RRO) to allow them to specify or record generic attributes that apply to a given hop.</t> </abstract> </front> <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7570"/> <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7570"/> </reference> <reference anchor="RFC7579" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7579" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC7579"> <front> <title>General Network Element Constraint Encoding for GMPLS-Controlled Networks</title> <author initials="G." surname="Bernstein" fullname="G. Bernstein" role="editor"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="Y." surname="Lee" fullname="Y. Lee" role="editor"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="D." surname="Li" fullname="D. Li"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="W." surname="Imajuku" fullname="W. Imajuku"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="J." surname="Han" fullname="J. Han"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <date year="2015" month="June"/> <abstract> <t>Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) can be used to control a wide variety of technologies. In some of these technologies, network elements and links may impose additional routing constraints such as asymmetric switch connectivity, non-local label assignment, and label range limitations on links.</t> <t>This document provides efficient, protocol-agnostic encodings for general information elements representing connectivity and label constraints as well as label availability. It is intended that protocol-specific documents will reference this memo to describe how information is carried for specific uses.</t> </abstract> </front> <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7579"/> <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7579"/> </reference> <reference anchor="RFC7581" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7581" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC7581"> <front> <title>Routing and Wavelength Assignment Information Encoding for Wavelength Switched Optical Networks</title> <author initials="G." surname="Bernstein" fullname="G. Bernstein" role="editor"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="Y." surname="Lee" fullname="Y. Lee" role="editor"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="D." surname="Li" fullname="D. Li"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="W." surname="Imajuku" fullname="W. Imajuku"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="J." surname="Han" fullname="J. Han"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <date year="2015" month="June"/> <abstract> <t>A Wavelength Switched Optical Network (WSON) requires certain key information fields be made available to facilitate path computation and the establishment of Label Switched Paths (LSPs). The information model described in "Routing and Wavelength Assignment Information Model for Wavelength Switched Optical Networks" (RFC 7446) shows what information is required at specific points in the WSON. Part of the WSON information model contains aspects that may be of general applicability to other technologies, while other parts are specific to WSONs.</t> <t>This document provides efficient, protocol-agnostic encodings for the WSON-specific information fields. It is intended that protocol- specific documents will reference this memo to describe how information is carried for specific uses. Such encodings can be used to extend GMPLS signaling and routing protocols. In addition, these encodings could be used by other mechanisms to convey this same information to a Path Computation Element (PCE).</t> </abstract> </front> <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7581"/> <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7581"/> </reference> <reference anchor="RFC7688" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7688" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC7688"> <front> <title>GMPLS OSPF Enhancement for Signal and Network Element Compatibility for Wavelength Switched Optical Networks</title> <author initials="Y." surname="Lee" fullname="Y. Lee" role="editor"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="G." surname="Bernstein" fullname="G. Bernstein" role="editor"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <date year="2015" month="November"/> <abstract> <t>This document provides Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) routing enhancements to support signal compatibility constraints associated with Wavelength Switched Optical Network (WSON) elements. These routing enhancements are applicable in common optical or hybrid electro-optical networks where not all the optical signals in the network are compatible with all network elements participating in the network.</t> <t>This compatibility constraint model is applicable to common optical or hybrid electro-optical systems such as optical-electronic-optical (OEO) switches, regenerators, and wavelength converters, since such systems can be limited to processing only certain types of WSON signals.</t> </abstract> </front> <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7688"/> <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7688"/> </reference> <reference anchor="RFC7689" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7689" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC7689"> <front> <title>Signaling Extensions for Wavelength Switched Optical Networks</title> <author initials="G." surname="Bernstein" fullname="G. Bernstein" role="editor"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="S." surname="Xu" fullname="S. Xu"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="Y." surname="Lee" fullname="Y. Lee" role="editor"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="G." surname="Martinelli" fullname="G. Martinelli"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="H." surname="Harai" fullname="H. Harai"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <date year="2015" month="November"/> <abstract> <t>This document provides extensions to Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) signaling for control of Wavelength Switched Optical Networks (WSONs). Such extensions are applicable in WSONs under a number of conditions including: (a) when optional processing, such as regeneration, must be configured to occur at specific nodes along a path, (b) where equipment must be configured to accept an optical signal with specific attributes, or (c) where equipment must be configured to output an optical signal with specific attributes. This document provides mechanisms to support distributed wavelength assignment with a choice of distributed wavelength assignment algorithms.</t> </abstract> </front> <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7689"/> <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7689"/> </reference> <reference anchor="RFC8174" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC8174"> <front> <title>Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words</title> <author initials="B." surname="Leiba" fullname="B. Leiba"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <date year="2017" month="May"/> <abstract> <t>RFC 2119 specifies common key words that may be used in protocol specifications. This document aims to reduce the ambiguity by clarifying that only UPPERCASE usage of the key words have the defined special meanings.</t> </abstract> </front> <seriesInfo name="BCP" value="14"/> <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8174"/> <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8174"/> </reference> <reference anchor="RFC8253" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8253" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC8253"> <front> <title>PCEPS: Usage of TLS to Provide a Secure Transport for the Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)</title> <author initials="D." surname="Lopez" fullname="D. Lopez"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="O." surname="Gonzalez de Dios" fullname="O. Gonzalez de Dios"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="Q." surname="Wu" fullname="Q. Wu"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="D." surname="Dhody" fullname="D. Dhody"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <date year="2017" month="October"/> <abstract> <t>The Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) defines the mechanisms for the communication between a Path Computation Client (PCC) and a Path Computation Element (PCE), or among PCEs. This document describes PCEPS -- the usage of Transport Layer Security (TLS) to provide a secure transport for PCEP. The additional security mechanisms are provided by the transport protocol supporting PCEP; therefore, they do not affect the flexibility and extensibility of PCEP.</t> <t>This document updates RFC 5440 in regards to the PCEP initialization phase procedures.</t> </abstract> </front> <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8253"/> <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8253"/> </reference> <reference anchor="RFC8779" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8779" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC8779"> <front> <title>Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for GMPLS</title> <author initials="C" surname="Margaria" fullname="Cyril Margaria" role="editor"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="O" surname="Gonzalez de Dios" fullname="Oscar Gonzalez de Dios" role="editor"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="F" surname="Zhang" fullname="Fatai Zhang" role="editor"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <date month="July" year="2020"/> </front> <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8779"/> <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8779"/> </reference> </references> <references pn="section-9.2"> <name slugifiedName="name-informative-references">Informative References</name> <reference anchor="LMP-PARAM" target="https://www.iana.org/assignments/lmp-parameters/" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="LMP-PARAM"> <front> <title>Link Management Protocol (LMP) Parameters</title> <author> <organization showOnFrontPage="true">IANA</organization> </author> </front> </reference> <reference anchor="I-D.lee-pce-pcep-ls-optical" quoteTitle="true" target="https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-lee-pce-pcep-ls-optical-09" derivedAnchor="PCEP-LS"> <front> <title>PCEP Extension for Distribution of Link-State and TE information for Optical Networks</title> <author initials="Y" surname="Lee" fullname="Young Lee"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="H" surname="Zheng" fullname="Haomian Zheng"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="D" surname="Ceccarelli" fullname="Daniele Ceccarelli"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="W" surname="Wang" fullname="Wei Wang"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="P" surname="Park" fullname="Peter Park"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="B" surname="Yoon" fullname="Bin-Yeong Yoon"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <date month="March" day="9" year="2020"/> <abstract> <t>In order to compute and provide optimal paths, Path Computation Elements (PCEs) require an accurate and timely Traffic Engineering Database (TED). Traditionally this Link State and TE information has been obtained from a link state routing protocol (supporting traffic engineering extensions). This document extends the Path Communication Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) with Link-State and TE information for optical networks.</t> </abstract> </front> <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-lee-pce-pcep-ls-optical-09"/> <format type="TXT" target="http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-lee-pce-pcep-ls-optical-09.txt"/> <refcontent>Work in Progress</refcontent> </reference> <reference anchor="PCEP-NUMBERS" target="https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="PCEP-NUMBERS"> <front> <title>Path Computation Element Protocol (PCEP) Numbers</title> <author> <organization showOnFrontPage="true">IANA</organization> </author> </front> </reference> <reference anchor="RFC3471" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3471" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC3471"> <front> <title>Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Functional Description</title> <author initials="L." surname="Berger" fullname="L. Berger" role="editor"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <date year="2003" month="January"/> <abstract> <t>This document describes extensions to Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) signaling required to support Generalized MPLS. Generalized MPLS extends the MPLS control plane to encompass time-division (e.g., Synchronous Optical Network and Synchronous Digital Hierarchy, SONET/SDH), wavelength (optical lambdas) and spatial switching (e.g., incoming port or fiber to outgoing port or fiber). This document presents a functional description of the extensions. Protocol specific formats and mechanisms, and technology specific details are specified in separate documents. [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t> </abstract> </front> <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="3471"/> <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC3471"/> </reference> <reference anchor="RFC4203" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4203" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC4203"> <front> <title>OSPF Extensions in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)</title> <author initials="K." surname="Kompella" fullname="K. Kompella" role="editor"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="Y." surname="Rekhter" fullname="Y. Rekhter" role="editor"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <date year="2005" month="October"/> <abstract> <t>This document specifies encoding of extensions to the OSPF routing protocol in support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS). [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t> </abstract> </front> <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="4203"/> <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC4203"/> </reference> <reference anchor="RFC4204" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4204" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC4204"> <front> <title>Link Management Protocol (LMP)</title> <author initials="J." surname="Lang" fullname="J. Lang" role="editor"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <date year="2005" month="October"/> <abstract> <t>For scalability purposes, multiple data links can be combined to form a single traffic engineering (TE) link. Furthermore, the management of TE links is not restricted to in-band messaging, but instead can be done using out-of-band techniques. This document specifies a link management protocol (LMP) that runs between a pair of nodes and is used to manage TE links. Specifically, LMP will be used to maintain control channel connectivity, verify the physical connectivity of the data links, correlate the link property information, suppress downstream alarms, and localize link failures for protection/restoration purposes in multiple kinds of networks. [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t> </abstract> </front> <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="4204"/> <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC4204"/> </reference> <reference anchor="RFC4655" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4655" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC4655"> <front> <title>A Path Computation Element (PCE)-Based Architecture</title> <author initials="A." surname="Farrel" fullname="A. Farrel"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="J.-P." surname="Vasseur" fullname="J.-P. Vasseur"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="J." surname="Ash" fullname="J. Ash"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <date year="2006" month="August"/> <abstract> <t>Constraint-based path computation is a fundamental building block for traffic engineering systems such as Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) and Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) networks. Path computation in large, multi-domain, multi-region, or multi-layer networks is complex and may require special computational components and cooperation between the different network domains.</t> <t>This document specifies the architecture for a Path Computation Element (PCE)-based model to address this problem space. This document does not attempt to provide a detailed description of all the architectural components, but rather it describes a set of building blocks for the PCE architecture from which solutions may be constructed. This memo provides information for the Internet community.</t> </abstract> </front> <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="4655"/> <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC4655"/> </reference> <reference anchor="RFC5420" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5420" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC5420"> <front> <title>Encoding of Attributes for MPLS LSP Establishment Using Resource Reservation Protocol Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE)</title> <author initials="A." surname="Farrel" fullname="A. Farrel" role="editor"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="D." surname="Papadimitriou" fullname="D. Papadimitriou"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="JP." surname="Vasseur" fullname="JP. Vasseur"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="A." surname="Ayyangar" fullname="A. Ayyangar"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <date year="2009" month="February"/> <abstract> <t>Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) may be established using the Resource Reservation Protocol Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) extensions. This protocol includes an object (the SESSION_ATTRIBUTE object) that carries a Flags field used to indicate options and attributes of the LSP. That Flags field has eight bits, allowing for eight options to be set. Recent proposals in many documents that extend RSVP-TE have suggested uses for each of the previously unused bits.</t> <t>This document defines a new object for RSVP-TE messages that allows the signaling of further attribute bits and also the carriage of arbitrary attribute parameters to make RSVP-TE easily extensible to support new requirements. Additionally, this document defines a way to record the attributes applied to the LSP on a hop-by-hop basis.</t> <t>The object mechanisms defined in this document are equally applicable to Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Packet Switch Capable (PSC) LSPs and to GMPLS non-PSC LSPs.</t> <t>This document replaces and obsoletes the previous version of this work, published as RFC 4420. The only change is in the encoding of the Type-Length-Variable (TLV) data structures. [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t> </abstract> </front> <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="5420"/> <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC5420"/> </reference> <reference anchor="RFC5521" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5521" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC5521"> <front> <title>Extensions to the Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) for Route Exclusions</title> <author initials="E." surname="Oki" fullname="E. Oki"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="T." surname="Takeda" fullname="T. Takeda"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="A." surname="Farrel" fullname="A. Farrel"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <date year="2009" month="April"/> <abstract> <t>The Path Computation Element (PCE) provides functions of path computation in support of traffic engineering (TE) in Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) and Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) networks.</t> <t>When a Path Computation Client (PCC) requests a PCE for a route, it may be useful for the PCC to specify, as constraints to the path computation, abstract nodes, resources, and Shared Risk Link Groups (SRLGs) that are to be explicitly excluded from the computed route. Such constraints are termed "route exclusions".</t> <t>The PCE Communication Protocol (PCEP) is designed as a communication protocol between PCCs and PCEs. This document presents PCEP extensions for route exclusions. [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t> </abstract> </front> <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="5521"/> <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC5521"/> </reference> <reference anchor="RFC6163" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6163" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC6163"> <front> <title>Framework for GMPLS and Path Computation Element (PCE) Control of Wavelength Switched Optical Networks (WSONs)</title> <author initials="Y." surname="Lee" fullname="Y. Lee" role="editor"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="G." surname="Bernstein" fullname="G. Bernstein" role="editor"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="W." surname="Imajuku" fullname="W. Imajuku"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <date year="2011" month="April"/> <abstract> <t>This document provides a framework for applying Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) and the Path Computation Element (PCE) architecture to the control of Wavelength Switched Optical Networks (WSONs). In particular, it examines Routing and Wavelength Assignment (RWA) of optical paths.</t> <t>This document focuses on topological elements and path selection constraints that are common across different WSON environments; as such, it does not address optical impairments in any depth. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.</t> </abstract> </front> <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="6163"/> <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC6163"/> </reference> <reference anchor="RFC6566" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6566" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC6566"> <front> <title>A Framework for the Control of Wavelength Switched Optical Networks (WSONs) with Impairments</title> <author initials="Y." surname="Lee" fullname="Y. Lee" role="editor"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="G." surname="Bernstein" fullname="G. Bernstein" role="editor"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="D." surname="Li" fullname="D. Li"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="G." surname="Martinelli" fullname="G. Martinelli"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <date year="2012" month="March"/> <abstract> <t>As an optical signal progresses along its path, it may be altered by the various physical processes in the optical fibers and devices it encounters. When such alterations result in signal degradation, these processes are usually referred to as "impairments". These physical characteristics may be important constraints to consider when using a GMPLS control plane to support path setup and maintenance in wavelength switched optical networks.</t> <t>This document provides a framework for applying GMPLS protocols and the Path Computation Element (PCE) architecture to support Impairment-Aware Routing and Wavelength Assignment (IA-RWA) in wavelength switched optical networks. Specifically, this document discusses key computing constraints, scenarios, and architectural processes: routing, wavelength assignment, and impairment validation. This document does not define optical data plane aspects; impairment parameters; or measurement of, or assessment and qualification of, a route; rather, it describes the architectural and information components for protocol solutions. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.</t> </abstract> </front> <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="6566"/> <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC6566"/> </reference> <reference anchor="RFC7446" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7446" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC7446"> <front> <title>Routing and Wavelength Assignment Information Model for Wavelength Switched Optical Networks</title> <author initials="Y." surname="Lee" fullname="Y. Lee" role="editor"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="G." surname="Bernstein" fullname="G. Bernstein" role="editor"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="D." surname="Li" fullname="D. Li"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="W." surname="Imajuku" fullname="W. Imajuku"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <date year="2015" month="February"/> <abstract> <t>This document provides a model of information needed by the Routing and Wavelength Assignment (RWA) process in Wavelength Switched Optical Networks (WSONs). The purpose of the information described in this model is to facilitate constrained optical path computation in WSONs. This model takes into account compatibility constraints between WSON signal attributes and network elements but does not include constraints due to optical impairments. Aspects of this information that may be of use to other technologies utilizing a GMPLS control plane are discussed.</t> </abstract> </front> <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="7446"/> <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7446"/> </reference> <reference anchor="RFC7449" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7449" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC7449"> <front> <title>Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Requirements for Wavelength Switched Optical Network (WSON) Routing and Wavelength Assignment</title> <author initials="Y." surname="Lee" fullname="Y. Lee" role="editor"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="G." surname="Bernstein" fullname="G. Bernstein" role="editor"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="J." surname="Martensson" fullname="J. Martensson"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="T." surname="Takeda" fullname="T. Takeda"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="T." surname="Tsuritani" fullname="T. Tsuritani"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="O." surname="Gonzalez de Dios" fullname="O. Gonzalez de Dios"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <date year="2015" month="February"/> <abstract> <t>This memo provides application-specific requirements for the PathCommunicationComputation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)with Link-Statefor the support of Wavelength Switched Optical Networks (WSONs). Lightpath provisioning in WSONs requires a Routing andTE informationWavelength Assignment (RWA) process. From a path computation perspective, wavelength assignment is the process of determining which wavelength can be used on each hop of a path and forms an additional routing constraint to optical light path computation. Requirements for PCEP extensions in support of opticalnetworks.</t></abstract>impairments will be addressed in a separate document.</t> </abstract> </front> <seriesInfoname='Workname="RFC" value="7449"/> <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC7449"/> </reference> <reference anchor="RFC8126" target="https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126" quoteTitle="true" derivedAnchor="RFC8126"> <front> <title>Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs</title> <author initials="M." surname="Cotton" fullname="M. Cotton"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="B." surname="Leiba" fullname="B. Leiba"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <author initials="T." surname="Narten" fullname="T. Narten"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true"/> </author> <date year="2017" month="June"/> <abstract> <t>Many protocols make use of points of extensibility that use constants to identify various protocol parameters. To ensure that the values in these fields do not have conflicting uses and to promote interoperability, their allocations are often coordinated by a central record keeper. For IETF protocols, that role is filled by the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA).</t> <t>To make assignments in a given registry prudently, guidance describing the conditions under which new values should be assigned, as well as when and how modifications to existing values can be made, is needed. This document defines a framework for the documentation of these guidelines by specification authors, in order to assure that the provided guidance for the IANA Considerations is clear and addresses the various issues that are likely inProgress,' value='draft-lee-pce-pcep-ls-optical-08' />the operation of a registry.</t> <t>This is the third edition of this document; it obsoletes RFC 5226.</t> </abstract> </front> <seriesInfo name="BCP" value="26"/> <seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8126"/> <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8126"/> </reference> </references> </references> <section anchor="sect-9" numbered="false" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-appendix.a"> <name slugifiedName="name-acknowledgments">Acknowledgments</name> <t pn="section-appendix.a-1"> The authors would like to thank <contact fullname="Adrian Farrel"/>, <contact fullname="Julien Meuric"/>, <contact fullname="Dhruv Dhody"/>, and <contact fullname="Benjamin Kaduk"/> for many helpful comments that greatly improved the contents of this document.</t> </section> <sectiontitle="Contributors" anchor="sect-11"><figure><artwork><![CDATA[ Fatai Zhang Huawei Technologies Email: zhangfatai@huawei.com Cyril Margaria Nokiaanchor="sect-11" numbered="false" toc="include" removeInRFC="false" pn="section-appendix.b"> <name slugifiedName="name-contributors">Contributors</name> <contact fullname="Fatai Zhang"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true">Huawei Technologies</organization> <address> <postal> <street/> <city/> <region/> <code/> <country/> </postal> <email>zhangfatai@huawei.com</email> </address> </contact> <contact fullname="Cyril Margaria"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true">Nokia SiemensNetworks StNetworks</organization> <address> <postal> <street>St. Martin Strasse76 Munich, 81541 Germany Phone: +4976</street> <city>Munich</city> <region/> <code>81541</code> <country>Germany</country> </postal> <phone>+49 89 515916934 Email: cyril.margaria@nsn.com Oscar16934</phone> <email>cyril.margaria@nsn.com</email> </address> </contact> <contact fullname="Oscar Gonzalez deDios TelefonicaDios"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true">Telefonica Investigacion yDesarrollo C/Desarrollo</organization> <address> <postal> <street>C/ Emilio Vargas6 Madrid, 28043 Spain Phone: +346</street> <city>Madrid</city> <region/> <code>28043</code> <country>Spain</country> </postal> <phone>+34 913374013 Email: ogondio@tid.es Greg Bernstein Grotto Networking Fremont, CA, USA Phone: (510) 573-2237 Email: gregb@grotto-networking.com ]]></artwork> </figure>3374013</phone> <email>ogondio@tid.es</email> </address> </contact> <contact fullname="Greg Bernstein"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true">Grotto Networking</organization> <address> <postal> <street/> <city>Fremont</city> <region>CA</region> <code/> <country>United States of America</country> </postal> <phone>+1 510 573 2237</phone> <email>gregb@grotto-networking.com</email> </address> </contact> </section> <section anchor="authors-addresses" numbered="false" removeInRFC="false" toc="include" pn="section-appendix.c"> <name slugifiedName="name-authors-addresses">Authors' Addresses</name> <author initials="Y." surname="Lee" fullname="Young Lee" role="editor"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true">Samsung Electronics</organization> <address> <postal> <street/> <city/> <region/> <code/> <country/> </postal> <email>younglee.tx@gmail.com</email> </address> </author> <author initials="R." surname="Casellas" fullname="Ramon Casellas, Editor" role="editor"> <organization showOnFrontPage="true">CTTC</organization> <address> <postal> <extaddr>Carl Friedrich Gauss 7</extaddr> <street>PMT Ed B4 Av.</street> <city>Castelldefels</city> <region>Barcelona</region> <code>08860</code> <country>Spain</country> </postal> <phone>+34 936452916</phone> <email>ramon.casellas@cttc.es</email> </address> </author> </section> </back> </rfc>