Re: ASON Routing Requirements to WG doc

[Zafar Ali <zali@cisco.com>]

Hi Kireeti,

I understand that the requirements that fall out of the scope of ITU-T recommendations are NOT part of this document/ work. However, I would like to understand some of the requirements in the document a little better. Specifically, when the document mentions that ?- support multiple hierarchical levels?, my question how many level of hierarchy is implied here? Similarly, when a requirement like, ?- support architectural evolution in terms of the number of levels of hierarchies, aggregation and segmentation of (control ?) domains? is stated, I would like to again understand the notion of ?levels of hierarchies?.

In short, I think there are a lots of TBD?s in the document that DT will be closing with ITU. I would like to see this as an ?interactive? process, rather than something like "here are the requirements, period". I think for the sake of prioritization and for providing cross-organization feedback, it will be very important to have some "room" for DT and ccamp.

Thanks

Regards? Zafar

=================================================================
Zafar Ali, Ph. D.                                 100 South Main St. #200,
Technical Leader,                                 Ann Arbor, MI 48104, USA.
Cisco Systems.                            (734) 276-2459.
=================================================================


At 07:42 PM 11/16/2003 -0800, Kireeti Kompella wrote:

> Hi Zafar,
>
> On Sun, 16 Nov 2003, Zafar Ali wrote:
>
> Thanks for your input!
>
> > Deborah made a very good point about goals of the design team during
> the WG
> > meeting. Specifically, she mentioned that the DT will work closely
> with ITU
> > to understand the requirements.
>
> Excellent.
>
> > I would really like to make sure that the
> > requirements are coming from the service providers
>
> If you read the design team charter, you'll see that the
> requirements
> come from the ITU, and that requirements *not* from the ITU have no
> place, especially since the document is entitled "ASON Routing
> Requirements".  However, the assumption is that the ITU got
> their
> input from service providers (or carriers).
>
> > and not from specific
> > implementations. So, I would like to see more activity from the DT
> in
> > closing on the requirements in the light of the needs of service
> providers,
> > before agreeing to the notion.
>
> Requirements from specific implementations and requirements that 
> the
> DT 'closes on ... [from] service providers' are not relevant in 
> this
> particular document.  If there is a 'further requirements for
> GMPLS
> routing', your concerns would be very relevant and valuable.
>
> However, for this document, given the charter of the design team, I
> would ask you to reconsider.
>
> Thanks,
> Kireeti.
> -------