Re: [CCAMP] New Version Notification for draft-tsaad-ccamp-rsvpte-bidir-lsp-fastreroute-03.txt

["Rakesh Gandhi (rgandhi)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Greg,

Thank you for your comments.

As you know, proposed draft addresses the two issues (state timeout and
bypass assignment) where FRR [RFC4090] is used for GMPLS packet tunnels.

Motivations for using FRR here is that it is widely deployed in the packet
MPLS-TE network today and can leverage all existing FRR detection and
restoration mechanisms and not have to deploy new protocol such as PSC
[RFC6378] for protection switchover co-ordination.

Thanks,
Rakesh




On 2014-02-03 9:40 PM, "Gregory Mirsky" <[e-mail]>
wrote:

>Hi Rakesh, et. al,
>since bi-directional co-routed LSP is MPLS-TP construct I believe that if
>local node protection is indeed required it should not use RFC 4090
>signaling but use ASSOCIATION object as described in Section 2.3 RFC 6689
>and RFC 6378 MPLS-TP Linear Protection instead.
>
>	Regards,
>		Greg
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: CCAMP [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Rakesh Gandhi
>(rgandhi)
>Sent: Monday, February 03, 2014 5:52 AM
>To: Lizhong Jin; Lizhong Jin; Frederic Jounay; Tarek Saad (tsaad); Mike
>Taillon (mtaillon); Zafar Ali (zali); Manav Bhatia; Zafar Ali (zali);
>Mike Taillon (mtaillon); Tarek Saad (tsaad); Frederic JOUNAY; Manav Bhatia
>Cc: CCAMP
>Subject: Re: [CCAMP] New Version Notification for
>draft-tsaad-ccamp-rsvpte-bidir-lsp-fastreroute-03.txt
>
>Hi WG,
>
>New revision of the published draft contains following updates:
>
>- Remove unidirectional bypass LSP (as per previous comments)
>- Fix syntax of the BYPASS_ASSIGNMENT object.
>- Misc editorial cleanup.
>
>
>Please provide your review comments.
>
>Thanks,
>Rakesh
>
> 
>
>On 2014-02-03 8:44 AM, "[e-mail]"
><[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>>
>>A new version of I-D,
>>draft-tsaad-ccamp-rsvpte-bidir-lsp-fastreroute-03.txt
>>has been successfully submitted by Rakesh Gandhi and posted to the IETF
>>repository.
>>
>>Name:		draft-tsaad-ccamp-rsvpte-bidir-lsp-fastreroute
>>Revision:	03
>>Title:		Extensions to Resource Reservation Protocol For Fast Reroute of
>>Bidirectional Co-routed Traffic Engineering LSPs
>>Document date:	2014-02-03
>>Group:		Individual Submission
>>Pages:		12
>>URL:            
>>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-tsaad-ccamp-rsvpte-bidir-lsp-
>>fas
>>treroute-03.txt
>>Status:         
>>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-tsaad-ccamp-rsvpte-bidir-lsp-fas
>>tre
>>route/
>>Htmlized:       
>>http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-tsaad-ccamp-rsvpte-bidir-lsp-fastrerou
>>te-
>>03
>>Diff:           
>>http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-tsaad-ccamp-rsvpte-bidir-lsp-fas
>>tre
>>route-03
>>
>>Abstract:
>>   This document defines Resource Reservation Protocol - Traffic
>>   Engineering (RSVP-TE) signaling extensions to support Fast Reroute
>>   (FRR) of bidirectional co-routed Traffic Engineering (TE) LSPs. These
>>   extensions enable the re-direction of bidirectional traffic and
>>   signaling onto bypass tunnels that ensure co-routedness of data and
>>   signaling paths in the forward and reverse directions after FRR. In
>>   addition, the RSVP-TE signaling extensions allow the coordination of
>>   bypass tunnel assignment protecting a common facility in both forward
>>   and reverse directions prior to or post failure occurrence.
>>
>>
>>                 
>>        
>>
>>
>>Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of
>>submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at
>>tools.ietf.org.
>>
>>The IETF Secretariat
>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>CCAMP mailing list
>[e-mail]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp