Liaison statement
Application Codes for Wavelength Switched Optical Networks
Additional information about IETF liaison relationships is available on the
IETF webpage
and the
Internet Architecture Board liaison webpage.
| State | Posted |
|---|---|
| Submitted Date | 2015-01-16 |
| From Group | IETF |
| From Contact | John Drake |
| To Group | ITU-T-SG-15 |
| To Contacts | greg.jones@itu.int |
| Cc | ghani.abbas@ericsson.com lbpanslow@ciena.com akatlas@juniper.net Malcolm.BETTS@zte.com.cn daniele.cecccarelli@ericsson.com adrian@olddog.co.uk greg.jones@itu.int kam.lam@alcatel-lucent.com scott.mansfield@ericsson.com Peter.Stassar@huawei.com sshew@ciena.com Steve.Trowbridge@alcatel-lucent.com zhangfatai@huawei.com ccamp@ietf.org tsbsg15@itu.int iesg@ietf.org |
| Response Contact | jdrake@juniper.net |
| Technical Contact | jdrake@juniper.net |
| Purpose | For comment |
| Deadline | 2015-03-02 Action Needed |
| Attachments | (None) |
| Liaisons referring to this one |
LS/r on Application Codes for Wavelength Switched Optical Networks (reply to IETF-CCAMP-LS014)
|
| Body |
Dear Q6/15 (WP2/15), The CCAMP working group of the IETF would like to draft the attention of Q6/15 to https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-wson-encode/ . This document describes encodings for a number of parameters that will be used in GMPLS protocols for operation of Wavelength Switched Optical Networks. The document is in its final stages and will soon progress to IETF last call. We would particularly welcome your review of sections 4.1.1-4.1.4. These sections describe the encoding of Application Codes as described in G.698.1, G.698.2, G.959.1, and G.695. The questions you might like to consider in this respect are: - Are we capturing current application codes? In other words, are our references correct and correctly used? - Are there any application codes we are missing? Is our set of references correct and have we included all of the application codes in the references? - Have we captured all of the parameters of the application codes? In our attempt to capture the application codes into formats we can use in our protocols, have we found all of the parameters that comprise the application codes? - Are the fields for each parameter of each application code appropriately sized and with the correct ranges? In other words, will we be able to properly encode the application codes defined today and their possible future extensions? In view of the progress of this work, we would be very happy to receive informal responses and guidance from individuals or from the Question as a whole if it has time to formulate an agreed response. Please use the CCAMP mailing list to provide input in accordance with standard IETF process. Many thanks for your attention. Fatai Zhang and Daniele Ceccarelli (CCAMP WG chairs) |