RE: Connection Deletion in GMPLS

["Fong Liaw" <fongliaw@yahoo.com>]

Hi Manoj

> 
> Fong,
>      I don't have any specific application requirement as of now but I
> doubt why the admin status is kept as a part Path Message. Admin
status
> is nothing but some event notification related to a call/LSP. It is
> most likely that if admin status need to be changed then no other
> parameter of the PATH message is to be changed viz ERO, Gen. Label
> Request, Protection information etc. Why CCAMP has made the admin
> status object as a part of PATH Message ?

We can say the same thing about traffic parameters, so why don't we
Invent another message just for this purpose. There are so many ways
To design a protocol, you described one way which will work, but how
Much we gain is not clear ... When that is the case, there is no 
compelling reason to change the current way of doing things. Notify
message was introduced because notification of fault needs to be 
super-fast so bypassing the per-node processing is very important.
I think we don't have the same level of requirement here.

> This could be done by keeping a small message with session and admin
> status object.
> The admin status object should not be considered as a Path message
> attribute.
> 

Rsvp-07 does say that if an admin status object does not exist in Path, 
its value should be assumed to be zero (this applies to all RSVP 
objects, BTW). So, strictly speaking admin status object is part of 
Path even in establish phase.

> While establishing the path state, I don't think we need to pass the
> admin status object then why to send the path message if there is some
> change in the admin status attribute.

See above.

> 
> Path message should be sent if there is any change in the objects
> previously transmitted and admin status is not a mandatory parameter
in
> connection establisment.
> 
> Regards,
> manoj.
> 
> Regards,
> manoj.
> 
> >From: "Fong Liaw" <fongliaw@yahoo.com>
> >To: "manoj juneja" <manojkumarjuneja@hotmail.com>,
<ccamp@ops.ietf.org>
> >CC: <Eric.Mannie@ebone.com>, <dimitri.papadimitriou@alcatel.be>
> >Subject: RE: Connection Deletion in GMPLS
> >Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 21:19:20 -0700
> >
> >Hi Manoj
> >
> >
> > >            Is it mandatory to send admin status as down in PATH
> message
> > > prior to connection deletion ? If yes, then the PATH message will
> >
> >THe -rsvp-07.txt says "SHOULD".
> >
> > > carry the
> > > objects like ERO, Generalized Label Request which are not
> > > necessary at the
> > > stage of connection deletion. But one need send these as these
> > > are mandatory
> > > parameters (at least Gen. Label Request) in the PATH message. I
> > > think, that
> > > these parameters are redundant at this stage as the only
> > > parameter that is
> > > going to be changed is admin status. What is the use of sending
> > > the complete
> > > PATH message at this stage ? This goal can be achieved by just
> > > having a new
> > > message which will carry the session object, admin status object
(but
> >not
> > > the parameters like Gen. Label Request, Protection Information,
ERO
> >etc.).
> >
> >The administrative state is to change a connection's state, so its
> >use is not just for deletion, although that is what's defined now.
> >The object needs to be processed on every node of the path, so Path
> >and Resv is a nature choice and is what RSVP do to
> >change/modify parameters or a connection/reservation.
> >
> >As I said in my last email, deletion performance
> >in a normal deletion scenario is not a major concern.
> >Do you have a real performance target that you can not
> >achieve because of the extra objects in the Path and Resv?
> >If so, can you share with us what they are ?
> >Otherwise, I guess we have to agree on this disagreement.
> >Or others can speak up :-)
> >
> >Regards,
> >-Fong
> >
> >
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
> http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx