RE: Working Group Last Call on draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-rsvp-te-call-00.txt

["Mack-Crane, T. Benjamin" <Ben.Mack-Crane@tellabs.com>]

Hi Adrian,

Some questions below...

Regards,
Ben

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Adrian Farrel [mailto:adrian@olddog.co.uk]
> Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2006 1:55 PM
> To: Mack-Crane, T. Benjamin
> Cc: ccamp@ops.ietf.org; Brungard, Deborah A, ALABS
> Subject: Re: Working Group Last Call on
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-rsvp-te-
> call-00.txt
> 
> Hi Ben,
> 
... snip ...
> 
> You appear to be making two comments in this paragraph.
> 1. The problem statement for the I-D is not sufficiently clear.

I did not make this comment, AFAIK.

> 2. The requirements for (and use of) the Link Capabilities
>    object are not clear.
... snip ...
> 
> With regard to the purpose and use of the Link Capabilities object,
this
> is
> driven mainly by the material in section 4.3. 
... snip ...
> What don't you understand? What are your questions?

OK, here is section 4.3 with some questions:

   It is useful for the ingress node of an LSP to know the link
   capabilities of the link between the network and the egress node.

Do the ingress and egress nodes terminate the LSP to be setup?

How is the "link between the network and the egress node" determined?

   This information may allow the ingress node to tailor its LSP request
   to fit those capabilities and to better utilize network resources
   with regard to those capabilities.

Generally an LSP setup request is generated by a network operator, who
has a particular purpose in mind.  What leeway does the ingress LSR have
to modify this request?

Generally networks work best when there are uniform means of providing
connectivity between clients of the network.  What kinds of "tailoring"
are envisioned?

   In particular, this may be used to achieve end-to-end spectral
   routing attribute negotiation for signal quality negotiation (such as
   BER) in photonic environments where network edges are signal
   regeneration capable. Similarly, it may be used to provide end-to-end
   spatial routing attribute negotiation in multi-area routing
   environments, in particular, when TE links have been bundled based on
   technology specific attributes.

What is "end-to-end spectral routing attribute negotiation"?
What is "end-to-end spatial routing attribute negotiation"?

  Call setup may provide a suitable mechanism to exchange information
  for this purpose, although several other possibilities exist.

Just because a mechanism can be defined does not mean that it should be.
Why is it necessary to define this mechanism, and add complexity to call
control, if another mechanism is required to do the same thing in cases
where call control is not used?
 
> 
> Thanks,
> Adrian
> 
> 
> 
============================================================
The information contained in this message may be privileged
and confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader
of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee
or agent responsible for delivering this message to the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reproduction,
dissemination or distribution of this communication is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
please notify us immediately by replying to the message and
deleting it from your computer. Thank you. Tellabs
============================================================