Re: [mpls-tp] mpls-tp Dual stack DCN? (was MPLS over OTN)

"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Tue, 05 August 2008 09:39 UTC

Return-Path: <owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-ccamp-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ccamp-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB6B13A6ACC for <ietfarch-ccamp-archive@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Aug 2008 02:39:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.63
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.63 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.136, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RDNS_NONE=0.1, STOX_REPLY_TYPE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OWWIQbyrUiO4 for <ietfarch-ccamp-archive@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Aug 2008 02:39:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from psg.com (psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 766BA3A6894 for <ccamp-archive@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Aug 2008 02:39:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org>) id 1KQIub-000F8G-Rh for ccamp-data@psg.com; Tue, 05 Aug 2008 09:33:01 +0000
Received: from [62.128.201.249] (helo=asmtp2.iomartmail.com) by psg.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <adrian@olddog.co.uk>) id 1KQIuX-000F7d-78 for ccamp@ops.ietf.org; Tue, 05 Aug 2008 09:32:59 +0000
Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id m758xlbx027141; Tue, 5 Aug 2008 09:59:50 +0100
Received: from your029b8cecfe (dsl-sp-81-140-15-32.in-addr.broadbandscope.com [81.140.15.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m758xhZv026991; Tue, 5 Aug 2008 09:59:45 +0100
Message-ID: <035b01c8f6d9$9b054890$91168182@your029b8cecfe>
Reply-To: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
From: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: "Maarten Vissers" <maarten.vissers@huawei.com>, "'Diego Caviglia'" <diego.caviglia@ericsson.com>, "'Italo Busi'" <Italo.Busi@alcatel-lucent.it>, "'Francesco Fondelli'" <francesco.fondelli@gmail.com>, <julien.meuric@orange-ftgroup.com>
Cc: <ccamp@ops.ietf.org>, <mpls-tp@ietf.org>
References: <003001c8f6d4$965d3690$8902a8c0@china.huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [mpls-tp] mpls-tp Dual stack DCN? (was MPLS over OTN)
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2008 09:54:46 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198
Sender: owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <ccamp.ops.ietf.org>

Maarten,

I think you need to get off this OSI thing.

Nothing the IETF does will require the use of IP in the DCN for an MPLS-TP 
stack. However, the IETF will only work on DCN protocols that are based on 
IP.

It will remain possible to manage MPLS-TP functionality using a DCN based on 
OSI, SNA, PNNI, or bluetak.

Since IP stacks are freely available and pretty small, and since it has 
already been established that IP forwarding is not necessarily required in 
the NEs, I don't know why this thread continues.

A

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Maarten Vissers" <maarten.vissers@huawei.com>
To: "'Diego Caviglia'" <diego.caviglia@ericsson.com>om>; "'Italo Busi'" 
<Italo.Busi@alcatel-lucent.it>it>; "'Francesco Fondelli'" 
<francesco.fondelli@gmail.com>om>; <julien.meuric@orange-ftgroup.com>
Cc: <ccamp@ops.ietf.org>rg>; <mpls-tp@ietf.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 9:23 AM
Subject: Re: [mpls-tp] mpls-tp Dual stack DCN? (was MPLS over OTN)


Diego,

The MPLS-TP functionality may be in equipment with e.g. SDH and OTN
functions. If such equipment uses MS-DCC to connect to the DCN, then it is
very likely that OSI is used. The MPLS-TP functions in this equipment should
**not** require that this equipment has to be equipped with two more DCN
connections supporting IP. I.e. it should be posible to manage MPLS-TP
functionality in equipment also via an OSI type DCN connection.

Regards,
Maarten



-----Original Message-----
From: mpls-tp-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-tp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
Of Diego Caviglia
Sent: 05 August 2008 09:38
To: Italo Busi; Francesco Fondelli; julien.meuric@orange-ftgroup.com
Cc: ccamp@ops.ietf.org; mpls-tp@ietf.org
Subject: [mpls-tp] mpls-tp Dual stack DCN? (was 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
_______________________________________________
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