RE: WG Consensus Call: draft-swallow-gmpls-overlay-00.txt

[Zafar Ali <zali@cisco.com>]

At 03:42 PM 12/3/2002 -0800, John Drake wrote:
> It should be a working group
> document

I second that opinion. I would also like to add that from
day 1, GMPLS was NOT design to address a particular service model only.
Hence, it will be unfair if someone says that GMPLS is ONLY limited to
define a full-peer model. In this regard, I would like to cite an already
available understanding stated in the GMPLS Architecture Draft
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-architecture-03.txt, 

"It (GMPLS) does not restrict the way that the layers work together.
Different models can be applied: e.g. overlay, augmented or integrated.
Moreover, each pair of contiguous layer may work jointly in a different
way, resulting in a number of possible combinations, at the discretion of
manufacturers and operators."  

So, clearly the draft falls within the scope of IETF CCAMP/ GMPLS and
should be pursued further as a WG document for further discussions. 

Re: overlap with OIF. The current OIF UNI specification defines a UNI
interface between a client SDH/SONET equipment and an SDH/SONET network,
each belonging to a distinct administrative authority (strict UNI with
low trust boundary). The draft addresses the case where there is a strong
trust between the Router and Optical (OXC based) network. 

Thanks

Regards… Zafar 


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kireeti Kompella
> [mailto:kireeti@juniper.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 11:39 AM
> To: ccamp@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: WG Consensus Call: draft-swallow-gmpls-overlay-00.txt
>
>
> Hi,
>
> This is a call for consensus to make the above document a CCAMP WG
> document.  This call will end Dec 17, 2002.
>
> Please indicate your opinion by replying to this email.
>
> Thanks,
> Kireeti.