[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ason-routing-reqts-01.txt

thanks, i encourage the ccamp community to share any
feedback they think relevant to make progress with
this wg i-d and reach consensus toward a second rev.
of this document (that i hope will be ready for last
call, as expected)

thanks,
- dimitri.

rick king wrote:
I think it's better now. Thank you for your kindly clarifying.

Rick

-----Original Message-----
From: Dimitri.Papadimitriou@alcatel.be [mailto:Dimitri.Papadimitriou@alcatel.be]
Sent: Friday, January 09, 2004 7:34 AM
To: rick king
Cc: ccamp@ops.ietf.org
Subject: Re: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ason-routing-reqts-01.txt


the RA represents a partition of the data plane and is used as the representation of the data plane within the control plane, in the
next revision will include a statement on this since this may be
where the mis-understanding comes from, wrt to relationship with
the RC, the text will be clarified from:

   " - A RA MAY support different routing protocols. There SHOULD NOT be
       any dependencies on the different routing protocols used.
     - For a RA, the cluster of RCs is referred to as a routing domain.
       The routing information exchanged between routing domains (i.e.
       inter-domain) is independent of both the intra-domain routing
       protocol and the intra-domain control distribution choice(s), e.g.
       centralized, fully distributed."

to:

    "- For a RA, the cluster of RCs is referred to as a routing (control)
       domain. The RC MAY support more than one routing protocol. There
       SHOULD NOT be any dependencies on the different routing protocols
       used.
     - The routing information exchanged between routing domains (i.e.
       inter-domain) is independent of both the intra-domain routing
       protocol and the intra-domain control distribution choice(s), e.g.
       centralized, fully distributed."

well hope this clarifies,
- dimitri.

rick king wrote:


Then what's relationship between a RA and a routing control domain?

thanks

Rick

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org]On Behalf Of Dimitri.Papadimitriou@alcatel.be
Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2004 6:57 AM
To: rick king
Cc: ccamp@ops.ietf.org
Subject: Re: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ason-routing-reqts-01.txt


hi, thanks for commenting, see in-line:

rick king wrote:



Some comments. Section 3.   ......The  ASON model allows for the protocols
used within different control domains to be different; and for the protocol
used between control domains to be different than the protocols used within
control domains. ......

The routing requirements contained in this draft apply to protocols used
between control domains(E-NNI routing) or protocols used within control
domains(I-NNI routing) or both?


-> both



...... - For a RA, the cluster of RCs is referred to as a routing
domain......

Does this means that RA=routing domain? Maybe routing control domain is more
align with G.7715.



-> yes, it is "routing (control) domain", we will clarify in the
   next version



Section 4.2.1 ...... - The second approach places the Level N routing
function on a separate system from the Level N+1 routing function. In this case, a communication interface must be used between the systems containing
the routing functions for different levels. This communication interface and
mechanisms are outside the scope of this document. .......

Is it possible that the Level N routing function and  the Level N+1 routing
function are from different vendors? If the answer is yes, then I think the
communication interface and mechanisms should be defined. Otherwise how can
you achieve inter-operate?



-> it is expected to cover multi-vendor case (note that the other
   alternative is single vendor only) so that this "communication
   interface" is expected to be defined but it is not within the
   scope of this document, what's within the scope is the routing
   information exchanged (ie ways to achieve the communication
   interface between these systems is not)

thanks,
- dimitri.



Thank you.

rick

-----Original Message----- From: owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org
[mailto:owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org]On Behalf Of
Dimitri.Papadimitriou@alcatel.be Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 5:19 AM To:
ccamp@ops.ietf.org Subject: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ason-routing-reqts-01.txt


all,

the following version of the "ASON routing requirements" document completes
the template proposed in the v00.txt:

<http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ason-routing-reqts-01.txt>


please provide any comment you think relevant in order to progress this wg
i-d

thanks, - dimitri.





--
Papadimitriou Dimitri
E-mail : dimitri.papadimitriou@alcatel.be
E-mail : dpapadimitriou@psg.com
Webpage: http://psg.com/~dpapadimitriou/
Address: Fr. Wellesplein 1, B-2018 Antwerpen, Belgium
Phone  : +32 3 240-8491