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

Re: GMPLS for MS-SPRing



Sure,

Would be happy to work on this together.

Igor

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Diego Caviglia" <Diego.Caviglia@marconi.com>
To: "Igor Bryskin <i_bryskin" <i_bryskin@yahoo.com>
Cc: "julien.meuric" <julien.meuric@francetelecom.com>; "ccamp"
<ccamp@ops.ietf.org>
Sent: Friday, October 14, 2005 10:46 AM
Subject: Re: GMPLS for MS-SPRing


>
> Hi Igor,
>          I agree with you but the ID is only a requiremet ID, we tried to
> avoid possible signalling and routing implementation that can satisfy the
> requiremnts.
>
> If there is interest in the community about this topic we'll produce IDs
to
> satisfy the requiremets.
>
> Regards
>
> Diego
>
>
>
> Igor Bryskin <i_bryskin@yahoo.com> on 14/10/2005 16.39.55
>
> To:    Diego Caviglia <Diego.Caviglia@marconi.com>,
>        julien.meuric@francetelecom.com
> cc:    ccamp@ops.ietf.org
>
> Subject:    Re: GMPLS for MS-SPRing
>
> Hi Diego,
>
> One thing that I'd suggest adding to your draft is
> ability to compute and signal LSP paths in terms of
> rings rather than in terms of links, and let ring
> border LSRs to expend the paths - provide paths within
> the rings. This mechanism is especially handy when
> there is a need for path-segment recovery on per-ring
> basis.
>
> Igor
>
> --- Diego Caviglia <Diego.Caviglia@marconi.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > Hi Julien,
> >            is always a pleasure to discuss this
> > topics with you.
> >
> > You are right and a clarification is definitely
> > needed here.
> > Basically Ring ID parameter is a common identifier
> > for all the TE links
> > belonging to the same ring.
> >
> > In such a way, in a no-control plane/pre-GMPLS
> > scenario, from a management
> > plane point of view it is possible to
> > discern if a given node belongs to a given ring by
> > checking its Ring ID.
> >
> > In an advanced scenario, where a control plane
> > (GMPLS based) is in place
> > "between" data and management plane, the Ring ID
> > parameter keeps on
> > doing the same function of making possible the
> > association of a given TE
> > link with the ring it belongs to.
> >
> > Why is this information needed at control plane
> > level? Think of a routing
> > protocol deployed over control plane, say GOSPF-TE.
> > When we come at dealing
> > with MSSPRING inherent requirements that control
> > plane has to be compliant
> > with, there are spring related informations that a
> > routing protocol has to
> > flood over the network (as opaque) to make possible
> > correct operation.
> > Among them there could be (depending on the strategy
> > that'll be followed)
> > the information about a TE link as belonging or not
> > to a ring and, if yes,
> > to which ring. In this case Ring ID serves the
> > purpose.
> > For a ingress node running Path Computation Engine
> > it is important to know
> > this attribute of a TE link to take special routing
> > decisions or to try to
> > satisfy given requirements involving MSSPRING
> > traversing.
> >
> > In addition, ring ID information could be used if
> > some information
> > interests only the TNE's belonging to a given ring
> > and has to be flooded
> > only to the TNEs in that ring. In this case Ring ID
> > could be used by a TNE
> > belonging to a ring to check if its OSPF neighbor
> > belongs tho the same ring
> > and hence if a given LSA has to be sent to it or
> > not.
> >
> > These are examples of possible usage of Ring ID
> > within control plane. Apart
> > from these specifc uses, there could be other cases
> > to be defined where a
> > similar identifier is needed. Of course it depends
> > on which strategy is
> > chosen to handle MSSPRING management and
> > requirements from control plane.
> >
> > Hope this clarify.
> >
> > Best Regards
> >
> > Diego
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "MEURIC Julien RD-CORE-LAN"
> > <julien.meuric@francetelecom.com>@ops.ietf.org
> > on 14/10/2005 13.58.16
> >
> > Sent by:    owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org
> >
> >
> > To:    "Diego Caviglia" <Diego.Caviglia@marconi.com>
> > cc:    "ccamp" <ccamp@ops.ietf.org>
> >
> > Subject:    GMPLS for MS-SPRing
> >
> > Hello Diego.
> >
> > I have just read your
> > draft-caviglia-ccamp-gmpls-msspring-req-00.txt about
> > GMPLS requirements for MS-SPRing. I am glad to see
> > you have again a
> > pragmatic approach to ease operators' migration from
> > legacy SDH to GMPLS.
> >
> > In paragraph "2.1 LSP Set-Up", you mention a
> > "RingId" required by the
> > management plane and useless for the data plane
> > itself. I am not
> > questionning this necessity (I am not a management
> > expert), but I do not
> > really understand why it should be handled by the
> > control plane. I imagine
> > this is related to communication between control and
> > management, but a
> > clarification may be required here.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Julien
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>