Re: A nerw ID is available on the repository draft-caviglia-ccamp-pc-and-sc-reqs-00

[WALTER ROTHKEGEL <wrothkegel@lucent.com>]

Adrian,

some thoughts:

While I think these requirements are real, I can not imagine that they
can be solved by some protocol extensions.

One reason is, as it is stated in the I_D, that "ownership by the Management
and Control Planes is strictly an implementation issue", which we can not
solve by a protocol alone.

Secondly, the MP and CP typically store additional data associated with the
connection, which is implementation specific, but needs also appropriate
conversion, or the conversion must at least ensure data integrity.

Finally, need to look, what is convertible at all. E.g., the MP may have
implemented certain broadcast or multicast connections, or special protection
schemes, which are not (yet) supported by the CP.

Regards

Walter

On 25.05.2006 19:53, Adrian Farrel wrote:
> Hi Diego,
> 
> Thanks for putting this I-D together. I think it gives a much clearer 
> picture of what you are trying to achieve with your discussion of moving 
> control of an LSP between the management plane and the control plane.
> 
> This seems like a reasonable set of requirements to me, and I would like to 
> see some discussion from folk on whether they think this is valuable work, 
> and whether we should start to look for protocol solutions.
> 
> Thanks,
> Adrian
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Diego Caviglia" <Diego.Caviglia@marconi.com>
> To: <ccamp@ops.ietf.org>
> Cc: "Dan Li <danli" <danli@huawei.com>; "Dino Bramanti" 
> <Dino.Bramanti@marconi.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2006 8:48 AM
> Subject: A nerw ID is available on the repository 
> draft-caviglia-ccamp-pc-and-sc-reqs-00
> 
> 
> 
>>A new ID is available on the ID repository
>>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-caviglia-ccamp-pc-and-sc-reqs-00.txt.
>>
>>The ID states some basic requrements for the possibility of turning a
>>Permanent Connection (PC) into a Soft Permanent Connection (SPC) and vice
>>versa, without actually affecting Data Plane traffic, no solutions are
>>proposed in the ID.
>>
>>Abstract
>>
>>  From a Carrier perspective, the possibility of turning a Permanent
>>  Connection (PC) into a Soft Permanent Connection (SPC) and vice
>>  versa, without actually affecting Data Plane traffic being carried
>>  over it, is a valuable option. In other terms, such operation can be
>>  seen as a way of transferring the ownership and control of an
>>  existing and in-use Data Plane connection between the Management
>>  Plane and the Control Plane, leaving its Data Plane state untouched.
>>  This memo sets out the requirements for such procedures within a
>>  Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) network.
>>
>>
>>Comments and suggestions are very welcome sxpecially from the carrier
>>community.
>>
>>Regards
>>
>>Diego
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 
> 
> 


-- 
________________________________________________________________________
Walter Rothkegel, Lucent Technologies Network Systems GmbH, Dept. O-SE
Thurn-und-Taxis-Str. 10-14, 90411 Nuernberg, Germany
Phone: +49 911 526-4084      Fax:   +49 911 526-6299
mailto:wrothkegel@lucent.com