[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
mpls-tp Dual stack DCN? (was [mpls-tp] MPLS over OTN)
Hi all,
So we are at the point where we agreed that Ip forwarding is not needed in the data plane nevertheless Ip is needed for sure for GMPLS protocols (if used).
Now in this thread we mentioned several times the DCN, are there any requirement about the protocol to be used for the DCN? Do we think that the DCN should support both OSI and Ip?
Given that we are in IETF I think the answer is that the DCN and configuration protocol must be Ip based, but may be could be useful state that somewhere; I agree that draft-gray-mpls-tp-nm-req-00.txt is the right place.
BR
Diego
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mpls-tp-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-tp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
> Of Italo Busi
> Sent: lunedì 4 agosto 2008 20.14
> To: 'Francesco Fondelli'; julien.meuric@orange-ftgroup.com
> Cc: ccamp@ops.ietf.org; mpls-tp@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [mpls-tp] MPLS over OTN
>
> I think that Julien's proposed rephrase better describes the requirement
> so I
> support it.
>
> It is worth noticing that in case of static configuration and OSI based
> DCN, the
> MPLS-TP data (transport) plane is actually configured without any IP
> functionality.
>
> However I think that DCN requirements should be described in
> draft-gray-mpls-tp-nm-req-00.txt.
>
> For the scope of draft-jenkins-mpls-mpls-tp-requirements-00.txt, I think
> that it
> is more appropriate to rephrase the requirement as proposed by Julien.
>
> Italo
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: mpls-tp-bounces@ietf.org
> > [mailto:mpls-tp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Francesco Fondelli
> > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 6:00 PM
> > To: julien.meuric@orange-ftgroup.com
> > Cc: ccamp@ops.ietf.org; mpls-tp@ietf.org
> > Subject: Re: [mpls-tp] MPLS over OTN
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 5:48 PM,
> > <julien.meuric@orange-ftgroup.com> wrote:
> > > Hi Francesco.
> >
> > Hi Julien,
> >
> > > I guess I understand your concern. I believe the original
> > intention was
> > > to say implicitely "It MUST be possible to operate and configure the
> > > MPLS-TP data (transport) plane without any IP functionality
> > *in the data
> > > plane*." My interpretation of these requirements is indeed that they
> > > apply to the MPLS-TP data plane only, not the
> > MPLS-TP-capable equipment,
> > > nor the MPLS-TP control plane...
> > >
> > > Anyway you're right, this could be confusing and it deserves a small
> > > rewording.
> >
> > Nice, thanks a lot.
> >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Julien
> >
> > Ciao
> > FF
> > _______________________________________________
> > mpls-tp mailing list
> > mpls-tp@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls-tp
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> mpls-tp mailing list
> mpls-tp@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls-tp