Re: CCAMP WG Last Call on GMPLS Routing Documents

[Sudheer Dharanikota <sudheer@nayna.com>]

Hi:


Suresh Katukam wrote:

> These routing documents do not cover many SONET/SDH cases at all.
> Even though it is generic routing, SONET/SDH is included in these and
> do not take care of TSI (Time Slot Interchangable) issues and protection
> related issues.
>
> Here is the list of issues:
>
> 1. Certain links are TSI capable - and certain are not. In this case, one
> needs to know the group of nodes that belong to this category (e.g.
> Ring ID for BLSR ) so that one can do path computation properly.

Some people feel that such requirements are to be part of signaling and
some feel that it should be part of the routing and signaling protocol. I belong
to the second category. As Kireeti said, in the design team this is one of
the issues we would like to address. There are some proposals already
on the table to address some of these issues...
draft-many-ccamp-srg-01.txt is one such draft.

- sudheer