Re: [CCAMP] FW: Last call on draft-ietf-ccamp-mpls-tp-cp-framework-02.txt

Curtis,
	 Please see below.

On 7/13/2010 8:53 PM, Curtis Villamizar wrote:
>
> In message<D6CB948F7AFD6F4881D4B4F80C8509AA07433478@gaalpa1msgusr7e.ugd.att.com>
> "BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A (ATTLABS)" writes:
>>
>> This WG Last Call will be extended to be a joint last call of the ccamp,
>> pwe3, and mpls wgs and the end date extended to July 26th.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> CCAMP Co-Chairs, PWE3 Co-Chairs, MPLS Co-Chairs
>
>
> This statement in draft-ietf-ccamp-mpls-tp-cp-framework-02.txt
>
>       94. Per-packet equal cost multi-path (ECMP) load balancing is not
>           applicable to MPLS-TP [TP-DATA-PLANE , section 3.1.1.,
>           paragraph 6].
>
> is in conflict with the cited statement in TP-DATA-PLANE.
>
>     Per-packet Equal-Cost Multi-Path (ECMP) load-balancing is outside the
>     scope of the MPLS-TP.
>
> Out of scope and not applicable are two different things.  Out of
> scope is more accurate and cp-framework needs to reflect this.

The DP document 
(http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mpls-tp-data-plane-04) says:
    Equal-Cost Multi-Path (ECMP) load-balancing MUST NOT be performed on
    an MPLS-TP LSP...

seems pretty strong to me....

That said, I don't think it is such a significant point in this 
document, so have no issue changing to :
    Per-packet equal cost multi-path (ECMP) load balancing is
    currently outside the scope of MPLS-TP [TP-DATA-PLANE ,
    section 3.1.1., paragraph 6].

Lou

>
> Curtis
>
>
> btw - does this get removed later?
>
>      102. Requirement intentionally blank.
> _______________________________________________
> CCAMP mailing list
> CCAMP@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp
>
>
>