RE: Doubt in draft draft-ietf-mpls-generalized-signalling-05.txt

[John Drake <jdrake@calient.net>]

Zhi,

I thought that Vishal had answered this a while ago.  A TE Link can now have
multiple switching (nee multiplexing) capabilities.  Given this, it's
necessary in signalling to identify which switching capability the LSP
wishes to use.

Thanks,

John

-----Original Message-----
From: Zhi-Wei Lin [mailto:zwlin@lucent.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 10:14 PM
To: manoj juneja
Cc: ccamp@ops.ietf.org; lberger@movaz.com; Eric.Mannie@ebone.com;
Kireeti Kompella
Subject: Re: Doubt in draft
draft-ietf-mpls-generalized-signalling-05.txt


Hi,

I have not heard any response to Manoj's question from the folks who
added this field as to what use it is envisioned...

Can someone enlighten me? Thanks!

Zhi


manoj juneja wrote:
> 
> Hi All,
>          I have following doubt in
> "draft-ietf-mpls-generalized-signalling-05.txt" draft.
> This draft has introduced new field switching type in Generalized
> Label Request Object. After looking at the structure of switching type
> field in latest OSPF document (GMPLS extensions to OSPF, Field Name :
> Interface switching capability descriptor), I could not make out why
> this is present in per LSP establishment request ? This field
> advertises the bandwidth (both min. and max.) for various priority
> levels (p = 0 -> 7). Furthermore, this field also contain Encoding
> (I assume LSP encoding type) field which is already there in
> Generalized Label Reqest object.
> I am not able to understand why this type of information is required
> in Per Connection Establishment Request ? Is the "switching type" field
only
> applicable when FA (forwarding adjacency) need to be established ?
> 
> Regards,
> manoj.
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp