Subject: [CCAMP] Please provide your comments - draft-dhillon-ccamp-super-channel-ospfte-ext

From: Abinder Dhillon <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 18:42:11 +0000

Folks,

http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dhillon-ccamp-super-channel-ospfte-ext

Regards.....Abinder

---

From: Ramon Casellas <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 21:11:19 +0200

> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dhillon-ccamp-super-channel-ospfte-ext

Hi Abinder,

Interesting draft, thank you.

One question, if I may: what bandwidth values (Unreserved, Max LSP Bw. 
per priority etc.) do you disseminate for the ISCD and other sub-TLVs?
Regardless of the actual encoding, we all seem to agree on disseminating 
available frequency ranges (or nominal freqs in the flexi-grid).
Yet I don't see a trivial mapping between available optical spectrum 
frequency ranges (e.g. within the C band) and "bytes per second".

The only mapping I can think of, if we assume a superchannel as a 
contiguous frequency slot (without gaps), is to identify the greatest 
available frequency range (in GHz) and to assume a worst case modulation 
with 1 Hz = 1 bit/s
Even in this case, the unreserved bandwidth per priority does not seem 
very useful, since it does not account for fragmentation, and this also 
means that the "max lsp bw" is updated at each change, imho.

Alternatively, if nominal flexi-grid frequencies are disseminated, 
aren't all bandwidth-related (sub)TLVs somehow deprecated?

Your comments are much welcome :-)

Thanks in advance and best regards
Ramon