Network Working Group                                      G. BernsteinInternet Draft                                        Grotto NetworkingUpdates: 6205                                                 Sugang XuIntended status: Standards Track                                   NICT                                                                  Y.Lee                                                                 HuaweiExpires: September 2015                                   G. Martinelli                                                                  Cisco                                                          Hiroaki Harai                                                                   NICT                                                          March 9, 2015     Signaling Extensions for Wavelength Switched Optical Networks                 draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-signaling-10.txtAbstract   This memo provides extensions to Generalized Multi-Protocol Label   Switching (GMPLS) signaling for control of Wavelength Switched   Optical Networks (WSON).  Such extensions are applicable in WSONs   under a number of conditions including: (a) when optional   processing, such as regeneration, must be configured to occur at   specific nodes along a path, (b) where equipment must be configured   to accept an optical signal with specific attributes, or (c) where   equipment must be configured to output an optical signal with   specific attributes. In addition this memo provides mechanisms to   support distributed wavelength assignment with choice in distributed   wavelength assignment algorithms.Status of this Memo   This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with   the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that   other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-   Drafts.   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six   months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents   at any time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as   reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txtBernstein, et al.    Expires September 2015          [Page 1]Internet-Draft        WSON Signaling Extensions       March 2015   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html   This Internet-Draft will expire on September 9, 2015.Copyright Notice   Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the   document authors.  All rights reserved.   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of   publication of this document. Please review these documents   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with   respect to this document.  Code Components extracted from this   document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in   Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without   warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.Conventions used in this document   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in   this document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].Table of Contents   1. Introduction...................................................3   2. Terminology....................................................3   3. Requirements for WSON Signaling................................4      3.1. WSON Signal Characterization..............................4      3.2. Per Node Processing Configuration.........................5      3.3. Bidirectional WSON LSPs...................................6      3.4. Distributed Wavelength Assignment Selection Method........6      3.5. Optical Impairments.......................................6   4. WSON Signal Traffic Parameters, Attributes and Processing......6      4.1. Traffic Parameters for Optical Tributary Signals..........7      4.2. WSON Processing HOP Attribute TLV.........................7      4.2.1. Resource Block Information Sub-TLV......................8      4.2.2. Wavelength Selection Sub-TLV............................9   5. Security Considerations.......................................11   6. IANA Considerations...........................................12   7. Acknowledgments...............................................13   8. References....................................................14      8.1. Normative References.....................................14Bernstein, et al.    Expires September 2015          [Page 2]Internet-Draft        WSON Signaling Extensions       March 2015      8.2. Informative References...................................15   Author's Addresses...............................................151. Introduction   This memo provides extensions to Generalized Multi-Protocol Label   Switching (GMPLS) signaling for control of Wavelength Switched   Optical Networks (WSON).  Fundamental extensions are given to permit   simultaneous bidirectional wavelength assignment while more advanced   extensions are given to support the networks described in [RFC6163]   which feature connections requiring configuration of input, output,   and general signal processing capabilities at a node along a Label   Switched Path (LSP).   These extensions build on previous work for the control of lambda   and G.709 based networks. This document updates [RFC6205] as make it   applicable to WSON-LSC capable equipment.   Related references with this document are [WSON-Info] that provides   a high-level information model and and [WSON-Encode] that provides   common encodings that can be applicable to other protocol extensions   such as routing.2. Terminology   CWDM: Coarse Wavelength Division Multiplexing.   DWDM: Dense Wavelength Division Multiplexing.   ROADM: Reconfigurable Optical Add/Drop Multiplexer. A reduced port   count wavelength selective switching element featuring ingress and   egress line side ports as well as add/drop side ports.   RWA: Routing and Wavelength Assignment.   Wavelength Conversion/Converters: The process of converting   information bearing optical signal centered at a given wavelength to   one with "equivalent" content centered at a different wavelength.   Wavelength conversion can be implemented via an optical-electronic-   optical (OEO) process or via a strictly optical process.   WDM: Wavelength Division Multiplexing.   Wavelength Switched Optical Networks (WSON): WDM based optical   networks in which switching is performed selectively based on the   center wavelength of an optical signal.Bernstein, et al.    Expires September 2015          [Page 3]Internet-Draft        WSON Signaling Extensions       March 2015   AWG: Arrayed Waveguide Grating.   OXC: Optical Cross-Connect.   Optical Transmitter: A device that has both a laser tuned on certain   wavelength and electronic components, which converts electronic   signals into optical signals.   Optical Responder: A device that has both optical and electronic   components. It detects optical signals and converts optical signals   into electronic signals.   Optical Transponder: A device that has both an optical transmitter   and an optical responder.   Optical End Node: The end of a wavelength (optical lambdas)   lightpath in the data plane.  It may be equipped with some   optical/electronic devices such as wavelength   multiplexers/demultiplexer (e.g. AWG), optical transponder, etc.,   which are employed to transmit/terminate the optical signals for   data transmission.3. Requirements for WSON Signaling   The following requirements for GMPLS based WSON signaling are in   addition to the functionality already provided by existing GMPLS   signaling mechanisms.    3.1. WSON Signal Characterization   WSON signaling needs to convey sufficient information characterizing   the signal to allow systems along the path to determine   compatibility and perform any required local configuration. Examples   of such systems include intermediate nodes (ROADMs, OXCs, Wavelength   converters, Regenerators, OEO Switches, etc...), links (WDM systems)   and end systems (detectors, demodulators, etc...). The details of   any local configuration processes are out of the scope of this   document.   From [RFC6163] we have the following list of WSON signal   characteristic information    1. Optical tributary signal class (modulation format).    2. FEC: whether forward error correction is used in the digital         stream and what type of error correcting code is used    3. Center frequency (wavelength)Bernstein, et al.    Expires September 2015          [Page 4]Internet-Draft        WSON Signaling Extensions       March 2015    4. Bit rate    5. G-PID: General Protocol Identifier for the information format   The first three items on this list can change as a WSON signal   traverses a network with regenerators, OEO switches, or wavelength   converters. These parameters are summarized in the Optical Interface   Class as defined in the [WSON-Info] and the assumption is that a   class always includes signal compatibility information.   An ability to control wavelength conversion already exists in GMPLS   signaling along with the ability to share client signal type   information (G-PID). In addition, bit rate is a standard GMPLS   signaling traffic parameter. It is referred to as Bandwidth Encoding   in [RFC3471].    3.2. Per Node Processing Configuration   In addition to configuring a node along an LSP to input or output a   signal with specific attributes, we may need to signal the node to   perform specific processing, such as 3R regeneration, on the signal   at a particular node.  [RFC6163] discussed three types of   processing:     (A) Regeneration (possibly different types)     (B) Fault and Performance Monitoring     (C) Attribute Conversion   The extensions here provide for the configuration of these types of   processing at nodes along an LSP.    3.3. Bidirectional WSON LSPs   WSON signaling can support LSP setup consistent with the wavelength   continuity constraint for bidirectional connections. The following   cases need to be separately supported:   (a)  Where the same wavelength is used for both upstream and        downstream directions   (b)  Where different wavelengths can be used for both upstream and        downstream directions.   This document will review existing GMPLS bidirectional solutions   according to WSON case.    3.4. Distributed Wavelength Assignment Selection MethodBernstein, et al.    Expires September 2015          [Page 5]Internet-Draft        WSON Signaling Extensions       March 2015   WSON signaling can support the selection of a specific distributed   wavelength assignment method.   This method is beneficial in cases of equipment failure, etc., where   fast provisioning used in quick recovery is critical to protect   carriers/users against system loss. This requires efficient   signaling which supports distributed wavelength assignment, in   particular when the centralized wavelength assignment capability is   not available.   As discussed in the [RFC6163] different computational approaches for   wavelength assignment are available. One method is the use of   distributed wavelength assignment. This feature would allow the   specification of a particular approach when more than one is   implemented in the systems along the path.    3.5. Optical Impairments   This draft does not address signaling information related to optical   impairments.4. WSON Signal Traffic Parameters, Attributes and Processing   As discussed in [RFC6163] single channel optical signals used in   WSONs are called "optical tributary signals" and come in a number of   classes characterized by modulation format and bit rate. Although   WSONs are fairly transparent to the signals they carry, to ensure   compatibility amongst various networks devices and end systems, it   can be important to include key lightpath characteristics as traffic   parameters in signaling [RFC6163].   LSPs signaled through extensions provided in this document MUST   apply the following signaling parameters:     . Switching Capability = WSON-LSC ([WSON-OSPF]).     . Encoding Type = Lambda ([RFC3471])     . Label Format = as defined in [RFC6205]   [RFC6205] defines the label format as applicable to LSC capable   device.    4.1. Traffic Parameters for Optical Tributary Signals   In [RFC3471] we see that the G-PID (client signal type) and bit rate   (byte rate) of the signals are defined as parameters and in   [RFC3473] they are conveyed Generalized Label Request object and theBernstein, et al.    Expires September 2015          [Page 6]Internet-Draft        WSON Signaling Extensions       March 2015   RSVP SENDER_TSPEC/FLOWSPEC objects respectively.    4.2. WSON Processing HOP Attribute TLV   Section 3.2. provided the requirements for signaling to indicate to   a particular node along an LSP what type of processing to perform on   an optical signal or how to configure that node to accept or   transmit an optical signal with particular attributes.   To target a specific node, this section defines a WSON Processing   HOP Attribute TLV. This TLV is encoded as an attributes TLV, see   [RFC5420]. The TLV is carried in the ERO and RRO LSP Attribute   Subobjects, and processed according to the procedures, defined in   [RSVP-RO]. The type value of the WSON Processing HOP Attribute TLV   is TBD by IANA.   The WSON Processing HOP Attribute TLV carries one or more sub-TLVs   with the following format:    0                   1                   2                   3    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+   |     Type      |   Length      |                               |   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+                               |   //                            Value                            //   |                                                               |   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+      Type         The identifier of the sub-TLV.      Length         Indicates the total length of the sub-TLV in octets. That is,         the combined length of the Type, Length, and Value fields,         i.e., four plus the length of the Value field in octets.   The entire sub-TLV MUST be padded with zeros to ensure four-octet   alignment of the sub-TLV. The Length field does not include any padding.      Value         Zero or more octets of data carried in the sub-TLV.   Sub-TLV ordering is significant and MUST be preserved. ErrorBernstein, et al.    Expires September 2015          [Page 7]Internet-Draft        WSON Signaling Extensions       March 2015   processing follows [RSVP-RO].    The following sub-TLV types are defined in this document:   Sub-TLV Name        Type    Length   --------------------------------------------------------------   ResourceBlockInfo    1      variable   WavelengthSelection  2      1 (3 octets padding)   The TLV can be represented in Reduced Backus-Naur Form (RBNF)   [RFC5511] syntax as:   <WSON Processing HOP Attribute> ::= <ResourceBlockInfo>   [<ResourceBlockInfo>] [<WavelengthSelection>]    4.2.1. ResourceBlockInfo Sub-TLV   The format of the ResourceBlockInfo sub-TLV value field is defined   in Section 4 of [WSON-Encode]. It is a list of available Optical   Interface Classes and processing capabilities.   At least one ResourceBlockInfo sub-TLV MUST be present in the   WSON_ Processing HOP Attribute TLV. No more than two ResourceBlockInfo   sub-TLVs SHOULD be present. Any present ResourceBlockInfo sub-TLVs MUST   be processed in the order received, and extra (unprocessed) SHOULD be   ignored.   The ResourceBlockInfo field contains several information elements as   defined by [WSON-Encode]. The following rules apply to the sub-TLV:   o  RB Set Field can carry one or more RB Identifier. Only the first      of RB Identifier listed in the RB Set Field SHALL be processed,      any others SHOULD be ignored.   o  In the case of unidirectional LSPs, only one ResourceBlockInfo      sub-TLV SHALL be processed and the I and O bits can be safely      ignored.   o  In the case of a bidirectional LSP, there MUST be either:     (a) only one ResourceBlockInfo sub-TLV present in a         WSON_Processing HOP Attribute TLV, and the bits I and O both         set to 1, or     (b) two ResourceBlockInfo sub-TLVs present, one of which has only         the I bit set and the other of which has only the O bit set.Bernstein, et al.    Expires September 2015          [Page 8]Internet-Draft        WSON Signaling Extensions       March 2015   o  The rest of information carried within the ResourceBlockInfo      sub-TLV includes Optical Interface Class List, Input Bit Rate      List and Processing Capability List. These lists MAY contain one      or more elements. These elements apply equally to both      bidirectional and unidirectional LSPs.   Any violation of these rules detected by a transit or egress node   SHALL be treated as an error and be processed per [RSVP-RO].   A ResourceBlockInfo sub-TLV can be constructed by a node and added   to a ERO_HOP_ATTRIBUTE subobject in order to be processed by   downstream nodes (transit and egress). As defined in [RSVP-RO], the   R bit reflects the LSP_REQUIRED_ATTRIBUTE and LSP_ATTRIBUTE semantic   defined in [RFC5420] and SHOULD be set accordingly.   Once a node properly parses a ResourceBlockInfo Sub-TLV received in   an ERO_HOP_ATTRIBUTE subobject (according to the rules stated above   and in [RSVP-RO]), the node allocates the indicated resources, e.g.,   the selected regeneration pool, for the LSP. In addition, the node   SHOULD report compliance by adding a RRO_HOP_ATTRIBUTE subobject   with the WSON Processing HOP Attribute TLV (and its sub-   TLVs) indicating the utilized resources. ResourceBlockInfo Sub-TLVs   carried in a RRO_HOP_ATTRIBUTE subobject are subject to [RSVP-RO]   and standard RRO processing, see [RFC3209].    4.2.2. WavelengthSelection Sub-TLV   Routing + Distributed Wavelength Assignment (R+DWA) is one of the   options defined by the [RFC6163]. The output from the routing   function will be a path but the wavelength will be selected on a   hop-by-hop basis.   As discussed in [HZang00], a number of different wavelength   assignment algorithms may be employed. In addition as discussed in   [RFC6163] the wavelength assignment can be either for a   unidirectional lightpath or for a bidirectional lightpath   constrained to use the same lambda in both directions.   In order to indicate wavelength assignment directionality and   wavelength assignment method, the Wavelength Selection, or   WavelengthSelection, sub-TLV is defined to be carried in the WSON   Processing HOP Attribute TLV defined above.   The WavlengthSelection sub-TLV value field is defined as:       0                   1                   2                   3Bernstein, et al.    Expires September 2015          [Page 9]Internet-Draft        WSON Signaling Extensions       March 2015       0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+      |W|  WA Method  |                    Reserved                   |      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+   Where:   W (1 bit): 0 denotes requiring the same wavelength in both   directions, 1 denotes that different wavelengths on both directions   are allowed.   Wavelength Assignment (WA) Method (7 bits):   0 - unspecified (any); This does not constrain the WA method used by   a specific node. This value is implied when the WavelengthSelection   Sub-TLV is absent.   1 - First-Fit. All the wavelengths are numbered and this WA method   chooses the available wavelength with the lowest index.   2 - Random. This WA method chooses an available wavelength randomly.   3 - Least-Loaded (multi-fiber). This WA method selects the   wavelength that has the largest residual capacity on the most loaded   link along the route. This method is used in multi-fiber networks.   If used in single-fiber networks, it is equivalent to the FF WA   method.   4- 127: Unassigned.   The processing rules of this TLV are as follows:   If a receiving node does not support the attribute(s), its behaviors   are specified below:   - W bit not supported: a PathErr MUST be generated with the Error     Code "Routing Problem" (24) with error sub-code "Unsupported     WavelengthSelection Symmetry value" (value to be assigned by IANA,     suggested value: 107).   - WA method not supported: a PathErr MUST be generated with the     Error Code "Routing Problem" (24) with error sub-code "Unsupported     Wavelength Assignment value" (value to be assigned by IANA,     suggested value: 108).Bernstein, et al.    Expires September 2015          [Page 10]Internet-Draft        WSON Signaling Extensions       March 2015   A WavelengthSelection sub-TLV can be constructed by a node and added   to a ERO_HOP_ATTRIBUTE subobject in order to be processed by   downstream nodes (transit and egress). As defined in [RSVP-RO], the   R bit reflects the LSP_REQUIRED_ATTRIBUTE and LSP_ATTRIBUTE semantic   defined in [RFC5420] and SHOULD be set accordingly.   Once a node properly parses the WavelengthSelection Sub-TLV received   in an ERO_HOP_ATTRIBUTE subobject, the node use the indicated   wavelength assignment method (at that hop) for the LSP. In addition,   the node SHOULD report compliance by adding a RRO_HOP_ATTRIBUTE   subobject with the WSON Processing HOP Attribute TLV (and its   sub-TLVs) indicated the utilized method. WavelengthSelection   Sub-TLVs carried in a RRO_HOP_ATTRIBUTE subobject are subject to   [RSVP-RO] and standard RRO processing, see [RFC3209].5. Security Considerations   This document is built on the mechanisms defined in [RFC3473], and   only differs in specific information communicated. As such, this   document introduces no new security considerations to the existing   GMPLS signaling protocols. See [RFC3473], for details of the   supported security measures. Additionally, [RFC5920] provides an   overview of security vulnerabilities and protection mechanisms for   the GMPLS control plane.6. IANA Considerations   Upon approval of this document, IANA is requested to make the   assignment of a new value for the existing "Attributes TLV Space"   registry located at http://www.iana.org/assignments/rsvp-te-   parameters/rsvp-te-parameters.xhtml, as updated by [RSVP-RO]:   Type  Name      Allowed on  Allowed on   Allowed on   Reference                   LSP         LSP REQUIRED RO LSP                   ATTRIBUTES  ATTRIBUTES   Attribute                                            Subobject   TBA   WSON      No          No           Yes          [This.I-D]         Processing         HOP         AttributeBernstein, et al.    Expires September 2015          [Page 11]Internet-Draft        WSON Signaling Extensions       March 2015         TLV   Upon approval of this document, IANA is requested to create a new   registry named "Sub-TLV Types for WSON Processing HOP Attribute TLV"   located at http://www.iana.org/assignments/rsvp-te-parameters/rsvp-   te-parameters.xhtml.   The following entries are to be added:   Value            Sub-TLV Type            Reference   1                ResourceBlockInfo       [This.I-D]   2                WavelengthSelection     [This.I-D]   All assignments are to be performed via Standards Action and   Specification Required policies as defined in [RFC5226   <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5226>].   Upon approval of this document, IANA is requested to create a new   registry named "Values for Wavelength Assignment Method field in   WavelengthSelection Sub-TLV" located at   http://www.iana.org/assignments/rsvp-te-parameters/rsvp-te-   parameters.xhtml.   The following entries are to be added:   Value          Meaning                    Reference   0             unspecified                [This.I-D]   1             First-Fit                  [This.I-D]   2             Random                     [This.I-D]   3             Least-Loaded (multi-fiber) [This.I-D]   4-127         unassigned   All assignments are to be performed via Standards Action and   Specification Required policies as defined in [RFC5226   <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5226>].   Upon approval of this document, IANA is requested to make the   assignment of a new value for the existing "Sub-Codes . 24 RoutingBernstein, et al.    Expires September 2015          [Page 12]Internet-Draft        WSON Signaling Extensions       March 2015   Problem" registry located at http://www.iana.org/assignments/rsvp-   parameters/rsvp-parameters.xml:   Value              Description                          Reference   107                 Unsupported WavelengthSelection                       symmetry value                       [This.I-D]   108                 Unsupported Wavelength Assignment                       value                                [This.I-D]7. Acknowledgments   Authors would like to thanks Lou Berger, Cyril Margaria and Xian   Zhang for comments and suggestions.8. References    8.1. Normative References   [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate             Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.   [RFC6205] T. Otani, H. Guo, K. Miyazaki, D. Caviglia, "Generalized             Labels for Lambda-Switch-Capable Label Switching             Routers", RFC 6205, March 2011.   [WSON-Encode]  Bernstein G., Lee Y., Li D., and W. Imajuku, "Routing             and Wavelength Assignment Information Encoding for             Wavelength Switched Optical Networks", draft-ietf-ccamp-             rwa-wson-encode, work in progress.   [WSON-OSPF] Lee, Y, Bernstein G., "GMPLS OSPF Enhancement for Signal             and Network Element Compatibility for Wavelength Switched             Optical Networks", draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-signal-             compatibility-ospf, work in progress.   [RFC5511] Farrel, A., "Routing Backus-Naur Form (RBNF): A Syntax             Used to Form Encoding Rules in Various Routing Protocol             Specifications", RFC 5511, April 2009.   [RFC3209] Awduche, D., et al., "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP             Tunnels", RFC 3209, December 2001.   [RFC3471] Berger, L., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label SwitchingBernstein, et al.    Expires September 2015          [Page 13]Internet-Draft        WSON Signaling Extensions       March 2015             (GMPLS) Signaling Functional Description", RFC 3471,             January 2003.   [RFC3473] Berger, L., Ed., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label             Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Resource ReserVation Protocol-             Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions", RFC 3473,             January 2003.   [RFC5420] Farrel, A., Ed., Papadimitriou, D., Vasseur, J.-P., and A.             Ayyangar, "Encoding of Attributes for MPLS LSP             Establishment Using Resource Reservation Protocol Traffic             Engineering (RSVP-TE)", RFC 5420, February 2009.   [RSVP-RO] Margaria, C., et al, "LSP Attribute in ERO", draft-ietf-             ccamp-lsp-attribute-ro, work in progress.    8.2. Informative References   [RFC5920] Fang, L., Ed., "Security Framework for MPLS and GMPLS             Networks", RFC5920, July 2010.   [RFC6163]  Y. Lee, G. Bernstein, W. Imajuku, "Framework for GMPLS             and PCE Control of Wavelength Switched Optical Networks",             work in progress: draft-bernstein-ccamp-wavelength-             switched-03.txt, February 2008.   [WSON-Info] G. Bernstein, Y. Lee, D. Li, W. Imajuku, "Routing and             Wavelength Assignment Information Model for Wavelength             Switched Optical Networks", work in progress: draft-ietf-             ccamp-rwa-info, work in progress.   [HZang00] H. Zang, J. Jue and B. Mukherjeee, "A review of routing             and wavelength assignment approaches for wavelength-routed             optical WDM networks", Optical Networks Magazine, January             2000.9. Contributors   Nicola Andriolli   Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Pisa, Italy   Email: nick@sssup.it   Alessio Giorgetti   Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Pisa, Italy   Email: a.giorgetti@sssup.itBernstein, et al.    Expires September 2015          [Page 14]Internet-Draft        WSON Signaling Extensions       March 2015   Lin Guo   Key Laboratory of Optical Communication and Lightwave Technologies   Ministry of Education   P.O. Box 128, Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications,   P.R.China   Email: guolintom@gmail.com   Yuefeng Ji   Key Laboratory of Optical Communication and Lightwave Technologies   Ministry of Education   P.O. Box 128, Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications,   P.R.China   Email: jyf@bupt.edu.cn   Daniel King   Old Dog Consulting   Email: daniel@olddog.co.ukAuthors' Addresses   Greg M. Bernstein (editor)   Grotto Networking   Fremont California, USA   Phone: (510) 573-2237   Email: gregb@grotto-networking.com   Young Lee (editor)   Huawei Technologies   5340 Legacy Dr. Building 3   Plano, TX 75024   USA   Phone: (469) 277-5838   Email: leeyoung@huawei.com   Sugang Xu   National Institute of Information and Communications Technology   4-2-1 Nukui-Kitamachi, Koganei,   Tokyo, 184-8795 Japan   Phone: +81 42-327-6927   Email: xsg@nict.go.j   Giovanni MartinelliBernstein, et al.    Expires September 2015          [Page 15]Internet-Draft        WSON Signaling Extensions       March 2015   Cisco   Via Philips 12   20052 Monza, IT   Phone: +39 039-209-2044   Email: giomarti@cisco.com   Hiroaki Harai   National Institute of Information and Communications Technology   4-2-1 Nukui-Kitamachi, Koganei,   Tokyo, 184-8795 Japan   Phone: +81 42-327-5418   Email: harai@nict.go.jpBernstein, et al.    Expires September 2015          [Page 16]