RE: ASON reqts

["Vishal Sharma" <v.sharma@ieee.org>]

Kireeti,

Thanks for your note. Some clarifications in-line.

-Vishal

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kireeti Kompella [mailto:kireeti@juniper.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2003 6:03 PM
> To: Vishal Sharma
> Cc: Ben Mack-Crane; ccamp@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: RE: ASON reqts


<snip>

> > Both documents would then have to be progressed in tandem within
> > the WG, because, as Ben rightly observed, routing specifications
> > do influence what is carried in signaling.
> 
> The progress of GMPLS signaling and routing was always separate, as
> can be seen even now: signaling has been an RFC for some time now,
> whereas routing is still in Last Call.
> 
> In fact, the charter states that signaling and routing be kept
> separate:
>  - Define signalling and measurement protocols that are independent of
>    each other.  This allows applications other than the signalling
>    protocol to use the measurement protocol; it also allows the
>    signalling protocol to use knowledge obtained by means other than the
>    measurement protocol.
> 
> This is not to say that they must be developed separately, but a
> too-strong tie between them would hurt the above goal.

I should have clarified that I did not mean that the two pieces of
work (routing and signaling) should be so tightly coupled that one
cannot proceed independently of the other. What I did mean was that
it would be better to initiate the routing work as well, so that 
any impact that routing has on signaling is captured in the signaling
work early on. This will be useful, as it'll prevent problems later.
(I think this was also largely true of the way in which 
we developed the GMPLS protocols.)

> Finally, there is a need for GMPLS for ASON signaling requirements,
> whereas there doesn't appear to be such a pressing need for GMPLS
> for ASON routing requirements.

I believe the initial routing requirements are captured in ITU doc.
G.7715. However, I am not sure whether, unlike signaling, the ITU has
begun work on the protocol-specific instantiations of routing requirements.
The apparent lack of GMPLS for ASON routing requirements might just be
a reflection of work not having begun in full swing on the routing
aspect yet. (As per my reasoning above, I would expect that the ITU too
would also be working on the routing aspect, perhaps some of the ITU 
experts here can shed more light on this.)

-Vishal