Subject: Re: [CCAMP] WSON Generalization and Extensions

From: Lou Berger <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2009 17:50:03 -0400

Hi Greg,
	Can you give a brief summary of if/how you've addressed the points
below in the latest drafts?

Much thanks,
Lou

On 5/22/2009 10:56 AM, Greg Bernstein wrote:
> Hi CCAMPers, at the San Francisco meeting there were two actions for RWA
> WSON (non-impairment case):
> (1) To look at how the WSON Framework and path computation Info Model
> could be generalized to other technologies.
> (2) To extend the WSON RWA Framework and models to apply to OEO
> switches, regenerators and similar systems.

---

From: Greg Bernstein <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 10:50:27 -0700

Hi Lou and CCAMPers see below. Feedback is appreciated particularly 
prior to the CCAMP session in Stockholm.

Greg B.

>> could be generalized to other technologies.
---> The "connectivity matrix" seemed to be the most reusable aspect of 
the WSON model based on the feedback we received. We updated the WSON 
RWA info model 
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-03.txt to 
make this clearer. More importantly the generalization is reflected in 
the update of the WSON RWA encoding draft 
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-wson-encode-02.txt 
which provides "generic"  sub-TLVs for specifying a nodes connectivity 
properties.
>> switches, regenerators and similar systems.
----> Here we needed to understand the compatibility between "optical 
signals" and different flavors of OEO switches and regenerators. The 
/*optical tributary signal*/ defined by the ITU-T (pointed out at the 
joint IETF/Q6 meeting back in March) helps us do this since these 
signals come in different "classes" based on modulation type and are 
characterized by a few critical parameters. In addition, the network 
elements would need to advertise information on their compatibility, 
e.g., can an OEO switch deal with both NRZ or RZ modulation (line 
coding) or only one of these. We put the results of this generalization 
work into 
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-bernstein-ccamp-wson-signal-00.txt 
so folks could review it independently rather than integrating it into 
the framework document. We also updated our individual submission on 
signaling to show how this would be incorporated into signaling 
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-bernstein-ccamp-wson-signaling-04.txt

-- 
===================================================
Dr Greg Bernstein, Grotto Networking (510) 573-2237

---

From: Giovanni Martinelli <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 23:48:33 +0200

Hi,

Greg Bernstein wrote:
> ---> The "connectivity matrix" seemed to be the most reusable aspect 
> of the WSON model based on the feedback we received. We updated the 
> WSON RWA info model 
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-03.txt 
> to make this clearer. More importantly the generalization is reflected 
> in the update of the WSON RWA encoding draft 

when referring to other technologies, there was already examples on the 
table?

thx,
G

> coding) or only one of these. We put the results of this 
> generalization work into 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> CCAMP mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp
>