RE: Polling for new WG I-Ds

["Bryskin, Igor" <ibryskin@movaz.com>]

> 
> Have you been in a situation when you just performed a 
> software upgrade and a network operator tells you that your 
> new release sucks and he wants the network in the state of 
> this morning prior to the upgrade? No? Than you are lucky.

JD: This means reverting to the previous version of control plane
software,
not the CP->MP->CP detour.

IB>> I am talking about the situation when simple reverting is not possible due to incompatibility of the new and old software releases.

Furthermore, on more general note, if we decide that we need to be capable of doing MP->CP, just from the simmetricity point of view it makes a lot of sense to me to have CP->MP capability for debugging and testing the MP->CP move (if for nothing else) 

Igor

> 
> Besides, what is the problem with moving "hundreds/thousands 
> of LSPs from CP->MP"? 
> 
> Igor
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brungard, Deborah A, ALABS [mailto:dbrungard@att.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 11:43 AM
> To: Drake, John E; Bryskin, Igor; Diego Caviglia; 
> Dimitri.Papadimitriou
> Cc: " ccamp " <ccamp; " owner-ccamp " <owner-ccamp; Adrian 
> Farrel <adrian; danli
> Subject: RE: Polling for new WG I-Ds
> 
> 
> Agree with John, and control plane failures don't (should 
> not/hope not) impact the data plane state. And before doing 
> such a sw upgrade, I would not want to have to move 
> hundreds/thousands of LSPs from CP->MP.
> 
> I'm not sure myself on what is meant by CP->MP, need to discuss more.
> 
> (chair hat off)
> Deborah 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org 
> [mailto:owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of Drake, John E
> Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 11:13 AM
> To: Bryskin, Igor; Diego Caviglia; Dimitri.Papadimitriou
> Cc: " ccamp " <ccamp; " owner-ccamp " <owner-ccamp; Adrian 
> Farrel <adrian; danli
> Subject: RE: Polling for new WG I-Ds
> 
> Snipped
> 
> > 
> > Besides I can see at least one quite real application for
> > CP->MP. Imagine that an operator wants to perform some major
> > software upgrade with a new software version significantly
> > incompatible with the previous one.
> 
> JD:  Except that we go to great pains to ensure that this 
> situation never occurs. 
> 
> 
>