RE: Moving LSP ownership between control plane and management plane

["Diego Caviglia" <Diego.Caviglia@marconi.com>]

In line

Regards

Diego



"Stephen Shew" <sdshew@nortel.com> on 20/07/2005 14.25.18

To:    "Diego Caviglia" <Diego.Caviglia@marconi.com>
cc:    <ccamp@ops.ietf.org>

Subject:    RE:  Moving LSP ownership between control plane and management
       plane

[CUT]

I have no issue with the motivation.  I just think there are more
scenarios for creating control plane state for an existing cross
connection.
[dc] Yes I agree, do you have any suggestion on other scenarios?

> If you do this then the bit should be renamed something like
> "cross-connection exists" and if set, then the signaling
> protocol does not tell the cross connection to set/release
> it. [dc] That is how it works apart for the name of the flag.

I realize that. What I'm suggesting is that the name reflect an action
rather than one of several possible purposes.
[dc] No problem with this, actually the original name of the flag was Fake
flag indicating that creation and deletion are not for real.
If there are no objection on this we can change the flag name.

[CUT]

The suggestion was that there are other scenarios in which establishment
of new LSP state for an existing cross connection is useful.  In the
MP->CP case, the MP initially holds state for the connection and before
the action is completed, both MP and CP hold state.  In the two LSP
example above, two entities in the CP hold state about the same
connection.  I see these two cases as similar in that the general case
is about multiple entities holding state for the same resource.
[dc] Yes agreed

>
> Stephen
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org] On
> > Behalf Of Diego Caviglia
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 05:44
> > To: Diego.Caviglia@marconi.com
> > Cc: ""Dimitri.Papadimitriou" <Dimitri.Papadimitriou";
> "ccamp" <ccamp;
> > "gnewsome" <gnewsome; "adrian" <adrian
> > Subject: RE: Moving LSP ownership between control plane and
> management
> > plane
> >
> >
> >
> > Sorry for this but may be not all have read the ID, I hope
> that having
> > the text help the discussion.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Diego
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >    Network Working Group
> >    Internet Draft
> > Diego Caviglia
> >    Document: draft-caviglia-mp2cpcp2mp-02.txt             Marconi
> >    Proposed Status: Updates RFC 3473
> > Dino Bramanti
> >
> >   Marconi
> >    Expires: December 2005
> > Nicola Ciulli
>
> <snip>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>