Re: GMPLS Routing Drafts

[Yangguang Xu <xuyg@lucent.com>]

Manoj,

I think Kireeti is right. Probably the confusion comes from "control channels".
It's actually a control network running OSPF or ISIS. The control network
topology doesn't need to be the same as the data plane topology. However, you
can assume that each pair of network elements have IP reachability through the
control network. GMPLS transport network topology is disseminated through opaque
LSA (in case of OSPF). At each NE, there are two logical topology databases. One
for the control plane network, a vanilla IP network. Another one is for the data
plane network, similar to OSPF-TE topology database.

Regards,

Yangguang

manoj juneja wrote:
> 
> Hi Kireeti,
>             I have read the second last para of the draft. It
> states "We call the interfaces over which regular routing adjacencies
> are established "control channels". This definition restricts its scope
> to routing adjacencies i.e. the control channels over which OSPF
> control packets are going to be sent. Does this mean for sending the
> GMPLS control messages, the same routing adjacencies are going to be
> used ? If yes, then how to distinguish between the control channels
> between two OSPF instances and GMPLS instances ? If no, then how this
> GMPLS control channel information is transmitted in routing protocols ?
> 
> Regards,
> manoj.
> 
> >From: Kireeti Kompella <kireeti@juniper.net>
> >To: ccamp@ops.ietf.org
> >Subject: Re: GMPLS Routing Drafts
> >Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2001 12:26:44 -0700 (PDT)
> >
> >Hi Manoj,
> >
> > > In section 5.1 of Ist draft, it is mentioned
> > > that "control channels are advertised into routing as normal links as
> > > mentioned in previous section". But in previous section of document I,
> > > there is no reference of control channels.
> >
> >Read the second last para of section 5.
> >
> > > Furthermore, in OSPF
> > > extensions document (IInd draft), there is no mention of control
> > > channels at all.
> >
> >Control channels are part of "regular" OSPF; the GMPLS OSPF draft
> >deals with the formats of the GMPLS TE extensions.  As the abstract says:
> >
> >    This document specifies encoding of extensions to the OSPF routing
> >    protocol in support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
> >    (GMPLS).  The description of the extensions is specified in [GMPLS-
> >    ROUTING].
> >
> >BTW, since you have a penchant for pedantry, let me point out that
> >it is inconsistent to call a "missing reference" (or a "no mention")
> >an "inconsistency".
> >
> >On the other hand, we do appreciate your careful reading.
> >
> >Kireeti.
> >
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp