This is an archive of the ONOS 1.4 wiki. For the current ONOS wiki, look here.

Meetings related to this use case happen every two weeks; All of the slides from past meetings are available here.

Below are some notes and direct links.

Jan 20 2016


  • ON.LAB
    • lot of work with Lumentum. no major blocks.
    • multi-layer ctrl plane - link discovery, disc. bandwidth, etc progressing
  • API for MEF SCA API app in REST (swagger) progressing, but compatibility with ONOS REST API is the challenge.
  • device availability
    • OF13 meter functions: Accton+OF-DPA or OVS don't support them, but CPqD does.
  • power budget
    • Lumentum will have a design later today, to be shared with e.g. Calient
    • Many types of connectors, so need converters - how many/which type?
    • distance between ROADMs, transponders, and optical switch?
  • request from Ciena: if orchestrating marketing/messaging, work with community manager.

Dec 16 2015


  • Started steps in integrating different components

    • based on simulators - Lumentum's at this moment - working with Ciena, Fujitsu for theirs

  • Delegation of hierarchy layers in ctrl plane

  • MEF services - how to leverage XOS to add VNF/cloud-type services in datapath

  • Power budget calculations w/ Lumentum - sanity check of physical testbed

    • Question: what's the accepted range of power levels?

      • We're waiting on Fujitsu for transponder datasheet.

      • We should have it for Ciena waveserver.

  • Bill Rembert identify requirements for minimum set of capabilities for carrier Ethernet services

  • Pretty confident in terms of progress

    • Netconf sim - Fujitsu - has, but figuring out how to sign it off

    • testbed - rack and power available, but no fiber for interconnect, etc. (Jimmy Jin : oplink can help.)

      • equiptment/tools to test connetivity, throughput, gather stats, etc. still needed

  • Demo at both ONF and OFC -  likely booth for ON.Lab, with equipment at show floor

Dec 8 2015

Discussion about which portions of the MEF specs relate to the use case.

Dec 3 2015

  • (no slides)


  • A few responses for the previous meeting's questionnaires are missing, notably Fujitsu
  • Company shutdown from 3rd week, but we (ON.Lab use case members) will probably be responsive
  • MEF - On OpenCE
    • Plan to work alongside (E)CORD
    • Aims:
      • Create MEF service components, work with this group about what's needed for realization
      • Show services (connectivity, OEM, orchestration...), including ones amenable to cloud setting
    • We should pick and choose a subset of topics to cover within MEF spec.
  • Questions for MEF work: Is it focused on LSO, or is it something else?
    • Initial work will be 'basic lower layer specs' (see above)
    • Extend to include orchestration and CORD-like services

Nov 19 2015


  • Questionnaire for all participants with devices to be part of the use case

    • These are part of the slides, please answer/ let us know about any missing things

  • Need to understand physical parameters of different components (power, signal qualities, etc)

    • Basically we ask: can we make it work?

    • a preliminary list

    • link design/engineering when we put everything together?

  • testbed (details)

    • Anyone who can lend us fiber? What test gear might we need (traffic generators, etc)?

    • it's possible to emulate CORD in Mininet, but it's better if we have real equipment.

    • how many U's is our test rack?

  • What are the functions of this PoC?

    • L2 VPN, video delivery (E2E view of idea)

    • Two main challenges - ROADM platform, and multicontroller coordination

  • CORD components - requirements? There's still some internal debate on how much of CORD we want to leverage.

    • What's needed for E2E provisioning? CORD in this respect is for connectivity

    • Do we want to Introduce services?

Nov 4 2015


  • Control plane topology - we'll stick to one logical controller sees all components (transponder, OCS/cross connect, ROADM, etc)
  • Connectivity matrix model (port-port connectivity constraints in DWDM's) for correct routing
    • Sample model based on YANG (a generic device connectivity model), but can be PCEP or anything else
    • For passing info to ONOS
      • i.e. "vendor X's transponder can't be reached from transponder of vendor Y"
      • Perhaps a tentative API on northbound, especially since we don't support YANG north
  • PoC storyboard.
    • Services that convey SLA + connectivity (like E-Line) and traditionally multicast, shifting to on-demand (like video)
    • CORD controllers (segmentrouting, vRouter)
      • our PoC doesn't focus on access technologies (G.Fast/GPON) connecting to CE
    • Metro cluster
      • uses aforementioned connectivity matrix between vRouter and ROADM
      • has no insight into CORD section of network
    • What is our inter-controller communication mechanism?
      • RPC-provider (bidirectional, using grpc as a starter) on metro controller side + Topology abstraction app on CORD controller
    • ROADMs w/ two transponders each from different vendors, connected to CORD-type deployment
      • All parts fit into a single rack (ROADMs/transponders, CORD HW + ctrls, Metro controllers)
    • Assume just one CORD rack as both a source and sink of service traffic (this is mostly for frugality).
      • We should be careful to show the traffic hair-pin route.
      • Also, hairpins might not be possible between two different vendor's transponders.
    • What are we showing?
      • Given that transponders behave, we'll be able to demo the interoperability at ROADM level.
      • We might be able to demo data-plane level interoperability at transponder level if we turn off FEC, modulation schemes match
        • but, it's a diff problem that we may or may not be able to solve, in which case, we need matching vendor endpoints.
  • Thoughts/comments?
    • GUI and observability? We need to think about it soon.
    • Supervisory channel/topology discovery amongst ROADMs - leave out for now and use network config system, though we will need it eventually.
    • Need to have vendors sanity check timeline/APIs

Oct 21 2015


  • Metro architecture: What are the levels of interaction between CORD and metro controllers?
    • One idea to have metro controller see simplified topology for CORD domains (i.e., a big switch).
    • How to see resource outside of CO? How to look into avail resource for full path for i.e. QoS?
    • Response for fallback in case of failure? Who has what visibility into resource information?
  • It would be nice to have an interface (managerial/visualization/etc) to peer into everything.
    • The displayed data doesn't have to be literally available everywhere, and the visualization can be based on aggregated info
  • CORD sites (Huawei): E-Line across metro using CORD architecture
    • clarifications - VNFs instantiated by OpenStack (XOS), and ONOS learns about them via XOS's calculation results. XOS in turn knows about the services/chaining requirements since it creates the VMs/instantiates services.
  • E-Line storyboard: XOS and interaction between local/global ctrl's? open question (currernt capabilities of XOS, etc)
    • VNF - VM/Docker or a bundle in ONOS? the former. The latter just sets up flows to chain them together
    • There are two types of services, per-subscriber or multi-tenant.
    • ONOS just sees hosts, or maybe even just switches and acting on traffic
  • Dissagregated ROADM: Is the device controller per-device or rack/racks?
    • The mapping should be tunable depending on need of visibility to one versus all devices
    • Why not provide ONOS as a VNF? We probably don't want 20 ONOS for 20 racks, or per-domain configs, and that would fit into the model of global orchestration (which we need)

Sep 24 2015

Sep 9 2015


  • No labels