RE: draft-fedyk-gmpls-ethernet-pbt-00.txt

[Dimitri.Papadimitriou@alcatel.be]

hi don

in the below sentence, "latter" was referring to VPN not to the second 
case

on the reference, i was pointing to the GELS framework (that needs some 
refresh anyway)

hope this clarifies
- dimitri.





"Don Fedyk" <dwfedyk@nortel.com>
Sent by: gels-bounces@rtg.ietf.org
01/07/2006 05:54
 
        To:     Dimitri PAPADIMITRIOU/BE/ALCATEL@ALCATEL
        cc:     ccamp@ops.ietf.org, gels@rtg.ietf.org, Lucy Yong 
<lucyyong@huawei.com>, gels-bounces@rtg.ietf.org, Igor Bryskin 
<ibryskin@movaz.com>
        Subject:        RE: draft-fedyk-gmpls-ethernet-pbt-00.txt


Hi Dimitri

It escapes me why the second case cannot be related to a VPN service as
viewed by the provider.  I'm not trying to link the current draft to a
VPN BTW.  There are no references to anything but the edge to edge model
in the draft.

Regards,
Don 

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dimitri.Papadimitriou@alcatel.be 
> [mailto:Dimitri.Papadimitriou@alcatel.be] 
> hi don - i would say that the GELS models are of two categories
> 
> o) edge to edge (SPC or SPVC model)
> 
> o) end-to-end (SC or SVC model) with two sub flavors one 
> where the end-node is not Ethernet device and one where the 
> end-node is an Ethernet device
> 
> i would not make any direct relationship between these models 
> and any VPN model simply because the latter refers to the 
> service while GELS is specifically linked to the "network 
> connectivity"
> 
> much thanks,
> - dimitri.
> 
> 
<snip>

_______________________________________________
gels mailing list
gels@rtg.ietf.org
https://rtg.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gels