[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: A new ID is available on the repository draft-caviglia-ccamp- pc-and-sc-reqs-00
hi adrian
CP[I] is to be complemented with I including values from the set
{t,s[i],lsp[i]}
t = time
s[i] = rsvp_instance
lsp[i] = values associated to the P/RSB indexed by 5_tuple[i]
thanks,
- dimitri.
"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
Sent by: owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org
01/06/2006 13:25
Please respond to "Adrian Farrel"
To: <Vijay.Pandian@sycamorenet.com>, "Diego Caviglia"
<Diego.Caviglia@marconi.com>
cc: Dimitri PAPADIMITRIOU/BE/ALCATEL@ALCATEL, "ccamp"
<ccamp@ops.ietf.org>, "Dino Bramanti <Dino.Bramanti", "Dan Li <danli"
Subject: Re: A new ID is available on the repository
draft-caviglia-ccamp- pc-and-sc-reqs-00
Hi,
I read Dimitri's comments as being spatial not temporal.
I.e. he drew a figure showing four LSRs.
Dimitri?
Cheers,
Adrian
----- Original Message -----
From: "Diego Caviglia" <Diego.Caviglia@marconi.com>
To: <Vijay.Pandian@sycamorenet.com>
Cc: """'Adrian Farrel'" <adrian"" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>;
"Dimitri.Papadimitriou" <Dimitri.Papadimitriou@alcatel.be>; "ccamp"
<ccamp@ops.ietf.org>; "Dino Bramanti <Dino.Bramanti"
<Dino.Bramanti@marconi.com>; "Dan Li <danli" <danli@huawei.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2006 8:20 AM
Subject: RE: A new ID is available on the repository draft-caviglia-ccamp-
pc-and-sc-reqs-00
>
> Hi Vijay,
> some answers in line.
>
> Regards
>
> Diego
>
>
>
> "Pandian, Vijay" <Vijay.Pandian@sycamorenet.com>@ops.ietf.org on
> 01/06/2006
> 04.34.12
>
> Sent by: owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org
>
>
> To: "'Adrian Farrel'" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>,
> Dimitri.Papadimitriou@alcatel.be
> cc: ccamp@ops.ietf.org, Diego Caviglia <Diego.Caviglia@marconi.com>,
> Dino Bramanti <Dino.Bramanti@marconi.com>
>
> Subject: RE: A new ID is available on the repository
> draft-caviglia-ccamp- pc-and-sc-reqs-00
>
> Adrian and Dimitri,
>
> Not sure why we need extra requirements to handle this case. Also not
sure
> why CP needs to guarantee identical states at [a] and [b]. May be I am
not
> understanding the case that is being pictured here.
>
> The way I read the requirements, once the control is transferred to MP
> (i.e., CP[a] -> MP), CP should forget everything about this LSP, Isn't
it?
> [dc] That is the idea.
>
> If this is true, then MP -> CP[b] should be treated as the ONLY general
> case
> of MP -> CP conversion, right?
> [dc] Yes, unless Dimitri calirifies better what he intend with state[a]
> and
> state[b]
>
> Regards,
> Vijay
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Adrian Farrel [mailto:adrian@olddog.co.uk]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 7:18 PM
> To: Dimitri.Papadimitriou@alcatel.be
> Cc: ccamp@ops.ietf.org; Diego Caviglia; Dino Bramanti
> Subject: Re: A new ID is available on the repository
> draft-caviglia-ccamp-pc-and-sc-reqs-00
>
>
> Interesting question.
>
> It would certainly be the case that the picture you draw could arise. I
> guess we would describe this in terms of SPCs. Is it necessary that
> identical state is held at [a] and [b]. In particular, the question of
> Session ID and LSP ID spring to mind.
>
> Yes, we need clear requirements for this type of situation. Want to
> suggest
>
> some?
>
> Adrian
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <Dimitri.Papadimitriou@alcatel.be>
> To: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
> Cc: <ccamp@ops.ietf.org>; "Diego Caviglia" <Diego.Caviglia@marconi.com>;
> "Dino Bramanti" <Dino.Bramanti@marconi.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 7:44 PM
> Subject: Re: A nerw ID is available on the repository
> draft-caviglia-ccamp-pc-and-sc-reqs-00
>
>
>> agreed -
>>
>> question: in case of move CP->MP who guarantees that the CP at state
[b]
>> retrieves its states it had at [a] e.g.
>>
>> MP->CP[a]->MP->CP[b]?
>>
>> do we need a specific requirement for this case ?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
>> Sent by: owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org
>> 25/05/2006 19:53
>> Please respond to "Adrian Farrel"
>>
>> To: <ccamp@ops.ietf.org>, "Diego Caviglia"
>> <Diego.Caviglia@marconi.com>
>> cc: "Dan Li <danli", "Dino Bramanti"
>> <Dino.Bramanti@marconi.com>
>> Subject: Re: A nerw ID is available on the repository
>> draft-caviglia-ccamp-pc-and-sc-reqs-00
>>
>>
>> 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.t
>
> xt
>> .
>>>
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>