Re: spc connections

[Ben Mack-Crane <ben.mack-crane@tellabs.com>]

So far, I see the following flaws in the proposed text:

1) No provision has been made to handle endpoint identifiers
  that are not internal network addresses.

2) The text does not address inter domain cases; those in which
  the ingress and egress endpoints are in different domains which
  do not publish their internal addresses to each other.

3) Kireeti's proposed text unnecessarily overrides a processing
  rule in rfc3473.

4) Lou's text still refers to creation of a new LabelSet object.

5) The procedures for handling the case in which a core network
  does not (by policy) accept route information from the ingress
  edge but must accept endpoint identification in an ERO must be
  elaborated, both for the case of an endpoint in that core network
  and the case of an endpoint in another domain that does not
  publish internal addressing.

Regards,
Ben

Yakov Rekhter wrote:

> Lyndon,
>
>  
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: John Drake [mailto:jdrake@calient.net]
> > Sent: Monday, November 17, 2003 1:06 PM
> > To: Ong, Lyndon; 'Kireeti Kompella'
> > Cc: ccamp@ops.ietf.org
> > Subject: RE: spc connections
> >    
> >
> > > I understand that you have many aspects to weigh, and 7713.2 is
> > > only one of them.  However, the SPC Label procedure is one where
> > > there have been no technical issues, and it has been implemented
> > > and tested.  Other people on the list have concluded that there
> > > is a reasonable case for separating this from the ERO, and it is
> > > not in fact supported by the current procedures in 3473.
> > >      
> > JD:  Do you think that if you continue saying this that it will somehow
> > become true?
> >
> > LYO: Yes, I believe that discussing issues on the mailing list may actually
> > lead to some better understanding and common agreement :o)  
> >    
>
> It certainly lead to better understanding - Lou's proposed text is
> the proof of this. Ditto for Kireeti's proposed text. 
>
> And now, since we do have the text, unless the text has *technical*
> flaws I would suggest to close the discussion.
>
> Yakov.
>
>  



-----------------------------------------
============================================================
The information contained in this message may be privileged 
and confidential and protected from disclosure.  If the 
reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an 
employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to 
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any 
reproduction, dissemination or distribution of this 
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received 
this communication in error, please notify us immediately by 
replying to the message and deleting it from your computer.

Thank you.
Tellabs
============================================================