Re: Poll for WG Adoption of Two WSON documents

[Greg Bernstein <gregb@grotto-networking.com>]

Thanks for the good comments Giovanni, we'll incorporate them into the 
next revision. Also see below.

Greg B.

Giovanni Martinelli wrote:
> Hi,
>
> yes support both
>
> I have also few comments on Framework WSON
>
> -  Section 3.3.1
> How about using a more generic OXC model? Or may be having a two 
> pictures, one with the current ROADM and one with an OXC (degree > 
> 2)?  For sure the simple ROADM it's the easier to understand but looks 
> to me too specific.
--> We've (authors of the WSON info model draft) have been discussing 
these issues lately. So we'll be sure to make this more generic in at 
least one of the drafts (if not both).
> The text: "As the degree of the ROADM increases beyond two it can have 
> properties of both a switch(OXC)and a multiplexer"
> To me looks like the figure 1 has already multiplexing capability 
> correct? For example a wavelength entering in what you call an add 
> port is multiplexed on a *line* (keeping same terminology of the 
> document) port.
>
> A simple questions on the switching matrix: looks like add/drop ports 
> and *line* ports are considered the same in the matrix, correct?
--> Yes. The difference between port types is given by the per port 
wavelength constraints.  We are currently trying to make this a bit more 
rigorous.
> - Section 4.1
> About time frame classification: Dynamic, pseudo-static and static. 
> While the text explains why an RWA would appreciate some temporal 
> information a classification like  "relatively short" or "moderately 
> long"  are a bit difficult to understand to me, Long or short are 
> compared to what?.
--> We'll fix this and/or remove it. Others share you concerns including 
the WG chairs.
> - Section 6 Security
> Does it worth a reference to 
> http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-fang-mpls-gmpls-security-framework-01.txt?
--> Yes.
> - A small ed note: in reference section the [G.994.1] is within both 
> normative and informative sub-sections...
--> All my fault.  Will Fix.
> Cheers
> G
>
>
>
>
>
>
> BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A, ATTLABS wrote:
> > CCAMP,
> >  
> > From Philadelphia, we had good support for adoption of two of the 
> > WSON documents as CCAMP working group documents:
> >  
> > - Framework for WSON
> > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-bernstein-ccamp-wavelength-switched-03.txt 
> >
> >  
> > - Lambda Labels
> > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-otani-ccamp-gmpls-lambda-labels-02.txt 
> >
> >  
> > Please express your opinions (authors, we welcome your opinion also).
> >  
> > Thanks,
> > Adrian and Deborah

--
===================================================
Dr Greg Bernstein, Grotto Networking (510) 573-2237