[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GMPLS Last Calls
- To: "Mannie, Eric" <Eric.Mannie@ebone.com>
- Subject: Re: GMPLS Last Calls
- From: Dimitri Papadimitriou <dimitri.papadimitriou@alcatel.be>
- Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 15:16:41 +0200
- CC: "'Ash, Gerald R (Jerry)'" <gash@att.com>, "'v.sharma@ieee.org'" <v.sharma@ieee.org>, ccamp@ops.ietf.org, mpls@UU.NET, "'Thomas D. Nadeau'" <tnadeau@cisco.com>, Yakov Rekhter <yakov@juniper.net>, Bala Rajagopalan <braja@tellium.com>, John Drake <jdrake@calient.net>
- Delivery-date: Mon, 28 May 2001 06:17:56 -0700
- Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com
- Organization: Alcatel Bell - IPO NSG
Eric,
Don't be so pessimistic...
I think (and as also proposed by Bala) that today LSP
"provisioning" which is specified within the GMPLS-SIG
can be associated with working, protection, shared-
protection LSP etc. Meaning there is not "semantic"
associated with the LSP established through GMPLS so
they can be used for any purpose.
"Restoration signalling" which can be implemented in
many ways is today under discussion. Bala thinks about
a dedicated lighweight protocol but other solution are
feasible using current signalling protocol extensions
or not. The good thing is that an open discussion has
been today engaged.
I don't see any problem with respect to GMPLS-SIG
document over there. I strongly believe that the
restoration issues can be proceeded indepedently
from the current GMPLS drafts today on last call.
- Dimitri.
"Mannie, Eric" wrote:
>
> Hello Jerry
>
> >correct, as I mentioned, SPs have been formally asked for their
> >*requirements*, but not on the GMPLS extensions
>
> Sorry ! It is an OPEN process since the beginning, everybody can contribute
> and write a draft. There is no formal process where requirements from
> operators are asked for. I am not aware of any IETF rule about that !
>
> You were welcome to work with us since 1.5 years but you never came to us.
> You cannot blame us that you never worked on it (we are not responsible for
> that)! This is true for the thousands of internet drafts being written at
> the IETF.
>
> It is the responsibility of each company individually to decide if they want
> to contribute or not ! It is not the job of others companies to go to each
> possible operator/manufacturer and to lobby to have them involved.
>
> Regards,
>
> Eric
begin:vcard
n:Dimitri;Papadimitriou Dimitri
tel;home:+32 2 3434361
tel;work:+32 3 2408491
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:http://www.alcatel.com
org:Alcatel Bell;IPO NSG - Antwerpen
version:2.1
email;internet:dimitri.papadimitriou@alcatel.be
title:Optical Networking R&S - Senior Engineer
adr;quoted-printable:;;Francis Wellesplein, 1=0D=0AB-2018 Antwerpen;;;;BELGIUM
fn:Papadimitriou Dimitri
end:vcard