OSPF Extensions for ASON Routing draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ason-routing-ospf-03.txt IETF67 - Prague - Mar’07 Dimitri Papadimitriou (Alcatel) <dpapadimitriou@psg.com>

Progress since IETF67 Became WG I-D after check v01.txt incorporates comments received on the list, discussion during ietf66 meeting and other improvements to facilitate reading v02.txt - editorial: includes definitions (part of info RFC 4652) in Section 5.1 and 5.2 v03.txt - incorporates comments from list and liaison

Multi-layer aspects No implied relationship between multi-layer networks and multi-level routing [RFC4652] Note: implementations MAY support a hierarchical routing topology (multi-level) for multiple switching layers and/or a hierarchical routing topology for one switching layer

Generic vs Specific Processing of the generic (technology independent) TE link attributes that are defined in this document and in [RFC3630], [RFC4202], and [RFC4203] Technology specific traffic engineering attributes (and their processing) MAY complement this document

Bw accounting RFC 4202: Interface Switching Capability Descriptor (ISCD) that delivers among others the information about the (maximum/minimum) bandwidth per priority an LSP can make use of. Per [RFC4202] and [RFC4203], one or more ISCD sub-TLVs can be associated to an interface (combined with the Unreserved Bandwidth ([RFC3630]) provides for the base bandwidth accounting) ASON context: additional optional and informational accounting information may be included in the technology specific field of the ISCD sub-TLV according to the technology supported (e.g. TDM). This information may be included when the representation and information in the other advertised fields are not sufficient for the specific technology. Note: the definition of processing rules for technology-specific information elements are beyond the scope of this document. When included, the format and encoding of such data MUST follow the rules defined in [RFC4202], and the presence and processing rules MUST be defined in a separate document.

Other points Resiliency: clarification on process for automated fail-over Policy: baseline for reachability

Next Steps Are we ready for last call ? Review process Routing protocol WG for protocol review (directorate ?)