ITU-T/OIF Report

1
ITU-T/OIF Report

• IETF 69 Chicago July 07
• L. Ong (Ciena)
• lyong_at_ciena.com

2
OIF

• Met April 07
• Planned September Demo (ECOC 07)
• Multiple vendors and carrier labs
• Focus on UNI and E-NNI Ethernet service support
• Also demonstration of control plane reliability
• Progress on UNI 2.0, E-NNI signaling 2.0 and
  interworking documents
• Close to completion of UNI 2.0
• Incorporating IETF work on MEF service support
• One liaison to this meeting
• Interlayer Model input to VCAT work in CCAMP

3
OIF Liaison

• Interlayer Model
• Based on current ASON work at ITU-T
• Discusses abstraction of server layer
  capabilities
• Possible multiplexing at client or server layer
• Addressing issues and establishment of signaling
  adjacencies at the client layer
• Some aspects of the model prototyped for Interop
• Separate SONET/SDH and VCAT hierarchical layers
• Differs from current VCAT draft
• Allows flexible reallocation of paths to VCGs
• VCAT Tspec used to identify VCAT requirements
• Need something similar to proposal in VCAT draft
• At SONET/SDH layer, use NVC or MT?

4
ITU-T

• SG 15 Meeting 6/07
• Four liaisons to CCAMP
• relationship between ITU and IETF
• looping issue
• VCAT signaling
• GMPLS calls

5
ITU-T Liaison 1

• Response to CCAMP liaison on Cooperative
  Relationship
• general issues
• will be discussed in ITU-IETF management team
  meeting
• concerns
• Q.14 believes there is an urgent need for
  cooperation in completing routing extensions to
  meet ASON requirements
• Q.14 wishes to work cooperatively with CCAMP to
  develop protocol solutions that are of value to
  the industry

6
ITU-T Liaison 2 3

• 2 Response to IETF liaison on looping
• Notes ASON architecture may introduce additional
  issues
• Hierarchical routing levels
• need to understand parent vs. child relationship
  is critical
• Concerns with Area ID-based approach
• overhead of storing and passing Area IDs,
• difficulty in changing an Area ID
• 3 Response to IETF Liaison on VCAT draft
• Notes that ITU has not seen updated draft since
  -02
• waiting on this for further comments

7
ITU-T Liaison 4

• 4 Response to IETF liaison on GMPLS Calls
• Comments from reading draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-rsvp-
  te-call-04.txt
• Call Identifier
• Note Call identifier format in G.7713.x and class
  num in RFC 3474 for G.7713.2
• Call destination
• Note UNI Transport Resource Identifier in G.8080
  and class num in RFC 3476 for G.7713.2
• Equivalent should be included in future ASON
  applicability draft
• Usage of these would not pose problems for RSVP
  instances that did not process calls