[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: LCAS and GMPLS
> > > Now, consider the LCAS.
> > > Does the LCAS define or have primary connetion ?
> > > I think all of conections in LCAS should be equivalent.
> >Why is primary conneciton valid? LCAS has nothing to do with
> >The Association object provides an *arbitrary* association ID that is
> >common across all LSPs in the same group, and unique within the context
> >the association source. There is no concept of a primary connection in
> >process of association.
> But, my concern is the value of Association ID in VCAT.
> Different from 1:n protection, generic VCAT group does not have
> In the case of 1:n protection, we define "primary" connection.
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-recovery-e2e-signaling-03.txt introduces the
Association object and describes its use for protection. It is not
surprising that it does not include its use for VCAT. We need to define
that use now.
When draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-recovery-e2e-signaling-03.txt says to use an
LSP-ID in the Association ID field, it is describing how you associate
LSPs for protection.
We need to write down how to use the Association ID for VCAT grouping.
That is, we must explain that the Association ID value should be an
arbitrary value unique within the scope of the Association Sourse address
and common to all members of the group.
> But, in the case of generic VCAT, the Association ID of second and
> connection should be first connection of LSP ID ?
> My answer is no.
The only person to suggest doing this is you. Everyone agrees with you
that the answer is no.
> The first connection in VCAT group can be torn down before the tear
> of secondary or third connection.
> If the second and third connection use LSP ID of first connection for
> their Association ID, the second and third connection of the VCAT
> use non-existing LSP ID for their Association ID in some state.
> Do we accept this kind of state ?
No, we don't. And we do not suggest it.