Re: [CCAMP] draft-ali-ccamp-rc-objective-function-metric-bound-03.txt

"Zafar Ali (zali)" <zali@cisco.com> Wed, 14 August 2013 16:27 UTC

Return-Path: <zali@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72B7D11E81F0 for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Aug 2013 09:27:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nxLbfKYNC-y4 for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Aug 2013 09:27:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.86.77]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCF2811E817D for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Aug 2013 09:27:50 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2057; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1376497671; x=1377707271; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:content-id: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=hrXUzVCwcP+JT3BSOPVw3jQz57h19XCWjZXv1d6MZ3g=; b=KblshP+fPpvSVJVvvg4iAe7/uZAs57oHWsvDMwANI0L61gbYu6QRm047 NC9LggDcaDBchXKV6j8mAd6bdmpb0+d2phXe/nw7dZ90bhiN1DWJBP2Ks 3svqHLogIfDDLpszzJVmDsrunK1PSLKRQRrD4ecS8qRdSjduCEo3XHAl7 o=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AiAFAPiuC1KtJXG//2dsb2JhbABbgwaBBb5lgSQWdIIkAQEBBIEFBgEIEQMBAQELHTkUCQgCBAESCBOHdbkrkB84BoMVdwOpNoMbgio
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.89,878,1367971200"; d="scan'208";a="247304991"
Received: from rcdn-core2-4.cisco.com ([173.37.113.191]) by rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 14 Aug 2013 16:27:45 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x01.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x01.cisco.com [173.36.12.75]) by rcdn-core2-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r7EGRjaE000982 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Wed, 14 Aug 2013 16:27:45 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x14.cisco.com ([169.254.4.190]) by xhc-aln-x01.cisco.com ([173.36.12.75]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Wed, 14 Aug 2013 11:27:45 -0500
From: "Zafar Ali (zali)" <zali@cisco.com>
To: John E Drake <jdrake@juniper.net>, Daniele Ceccarelli <daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com>, Fatai Zhang <zhangfatai@huawei.com>, "Matt Hartley (mhartley)" <mhartley@cisco.com>, "CCAMP (ccamp@ietf.org)" <ccamp@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [CCAMP] draft-ali-ccamp-rc-objective-function-metric-bound-03.txt
Thread-Index: Ac6UXh3OMYPEaNUmSzSE7m3SYlvx7wARnPhAACdi0mAAC5fEgACIaeoAAAUjU4AAIFYxgAAx2VuAAAtnb4D//8mUAIAAXYMA///F+AA=
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 16:27:44 +0000
Message-ID: <B6585D85A128FD47857D0FD58D8120D30EA11918@xmb-rcd-x14.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <4591527cdda44db8b86060f1eaf8e713@BY2PR05MB142.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.3.120616
x-originating-ip: [10.82.236.79]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-ID: <483B6D8530DB3D4ABCCD7C6654F2881D@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] draft-ali-ccamp-rc-objective-function-metric-bound-03.txt
X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group <ccamp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ccamp>
List-Post: <mailto:ccamp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 16:27:56 -0000

John: 

BTW I can say the same for the PCEP only based solution you have been
enforcing. 

You have been constantly ignoring everything said to force a PCEP only
based solution, including requirements that there are existing and new
deployment scenarios in which having a PCE is not a luxury (just to suite
"your" solution). Some of this is just OAM and other cost considerations.
I may detail more in a future response but really running out of stream
and feel like I am hitting a brick wall.

N. b. Some of your objections are for solutions outlined in WG documents
(e.g., metric and SRLG recording), for which WG has already spoken.

Thanks

Regards Š Zafar


-----Original Message-----
From: "jdrake@juniper.net" <jdrake@juniper.net>
Date: Wednesday, August 14, 2013 11:55 AM
To: zali <zali@cisco.com>om>, Daniele Ceccarelli
<daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com>om>, Fatai Zhang <zhangfatai@huawei.com>om>,
"Matt Hartley (mhartley)" <mhartley@cisco.com>om>, "ccamp@ietf.org"
<ccamp@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: [CCAMP]
draft-ali-ccamp-rc-objective-function-metric-bound-03.txt

>Zafar,
>
>Neither Daniele nor you has offered any reason, technical or otherwise,
>why a PCEP adjacency across the UNI is not sufficient, or why embedding
>PCEP within RSVP-TE is either necessary or desirable.
>
>I think the WG should decide, *not* the Market .
>
>Yours Irrespectively,
>
>John
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Zafar Ali (zali) [mailto:zali@cisco.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2013 7:21 AM
>> To: Daniele Ceccarelli; Fatai Zhang; John E Drake; Matt Hartley
>>(mhartley);
>> CCAMP (ccamp@ietf.org)
>> Subject: Re: [CCAMP] draft-ali-ccamp-rc-objective-function-metric-bound-
>> 03.txt
>> 
>> 
>> >John and I are saying exactly the same thing. We don't disagree on
>> >procedures, we only disagree on PCEP vs RSVP-TE
>> >
>> 
>> I have the same disagreement with John. We have a situation that we
>>should
>> let the Market decide.
>> 
>> Thanks
>> 
>> Regards...Zafar
>> 
>> 
>
>