|
Dear Zafar,
if I'm not wrong, draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-architecture-02.txt is
going to be ready for IETF Last Call,
but some points seems to be without a full consensus yet.
Anyway, is there any action in IETF now to
solve "preliminary" FA-LSPs issues (e.g. Pah TLV, FA color/metric
assignment)? IMO, draft-vandenbosch-mpls-fa-considerations-00.txt
just points out these issues!
Thanks
Gino
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, May 02, 2002
9:21 PM
Subject: Re: Path
TLV
At 04:22 PM 5/2/2002 +0200, Gino Carrozzo wrote:
Hi all,
in
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-architecture-02.txt (Sec. 10.1) an OSPF/ISIS
Path
TLV is proposed to handle the info about the path taken by an
FA-LSP
associated with a TE-Link (FA).
But the new versions of the
GMPLS routing and hierarchy drafts
(i.e. lsp-hierarchy-05.txt /
ospf-gmpls-extensions-06.txt /
isis-gmpls-extensions-10.txt)
does not
describe this TLV.
Is this an editorial bug for the architecture-02
draft?
Dear Gino,
No; you may like to refer to the
following draft for some "preliminary
" details on this subject.
http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-vandenbosch-mpls-fa-considerations-00.txt
Thanks
Regards... Zafar
Thanks
Gino
|