[CCAMP] 答复: OVRLY - signaling extensions

Fatai Zhang <zhangfatai@huawei.com> Sat, 08 March 2014 00:34 UTC

Return-Path: <zhangfatai@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B93931A031E for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Mar 2014 16:34:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.204
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.204 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, CHARSET_FARAWAY_HEADER=3.2, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001, WEIRD_PORT=0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Qd3hksT80VWE for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Mar 2014 16:34:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70BAE1A0313 for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Mar 2014 16:34:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from (EHLO lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com) ([]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id BBV93340; Sat, 08 Mar 2014 00:34:00 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from LHREML401-HUB.china.huawei.com ( by lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id; Sat, 8 Mar 2014 00:33:24 +0000
Received: from SZXEMA401-HUB.china.huawei.com ( by lhreml401-hub.china.huawei.com ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id; Sat, 8 Mar 2014 00:33:58 +0000
Received: from SZXEMA504-MBS.china.huawei.com ([]) by SZXEMA401-HUB.china.huawei.com ([]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Sat, 8 Mar 2014 08:33:56 +0800
From: Fatai Zhang <zhangfatai@huawei.com>
To: Rajan Rao <rrao@infinera.com>, Dieter Beller <Dieter.Beller@alcatel-lucent.com>
Thread-Topic: OVRLY - signaling extensions
Thread-Index: Ac85YJDrYXZOuOMaR1Gk+fcsuXhJCgBBUEbQ
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2014 00:33:54 +0000
Message-ID: <F82A4B6D50F9464B8EBA55651F541CF85CAD5E4C@SZXEMA504-MBS.china.huawei.com>
References: <650AA355E323C34D9D4AAEED952E053D3FC6BBEA@SV-EXDB-PROD2.infinera.com>
In-Reply-To: <650AA355E323C34D9D4AAEED952E053D3FC6BBEA@SV-EXDB-PROD2.infinera.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_F82A4B6D50F9464B8EBA55651F541CF85CAD5E4CSZXEMA504MBSchi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/qYETR34jQXGQzptBa3M4s9Nieuo
Cc: CCAMP <ccamp@ietf.org>
Subject: [CCAMP] =?gb2312?b?tPC4tDogT1ZSTFkgLSBzaWduYWxpbmcgZXh0ZW5zaW9u?= =?gb2312?b?cw==?=
X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Sat, 08 Mar 2014 00:34:11 -0000

Hi Rajan,

I would say “by cookie” if I understand your question correctly.



发件人: Rajan Rao [mailto:rrao@infinera.com]
发送时间: 2014年3月7日 1:33
收件人: Fatai Zhang; Dieter Beller
主题: OVRLY - signaling extensions

Changed the title to Overlay topic.

Dieter,  Fatai

One more question:

In case of PCE,  I assume CE is the one talking to PCE (fig-2 in uni-app draft).
In cases where CE reachability is not known & PE1 is the one talking to PCE (say CE makes a request to PE1 first),  how do you communicate PE2 info back to CE?


From: Fatai Zhang [mailto:zhangfatai@huawei.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2014 4:49 PM
To: Dieter Beller; Rajan Rao
Subject: 答复: [CCAMP] Raw notes available for review/comment

Hi Rajan,

I think your question is a general question, and should be out of scope of “LSP diversity” topic, :)

However, there are lots of approaches for CE to know why “PE1” should be picked up besides the way mentioned by Dieter below, e.g, qualified TE information (besides reachability) known by CE, manual configuration, or PCE can help as described in draft-zhang-ccamp-gmpls-uni-app<http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-zhang-ccamp-gmpls-uni-app-05.txt>xt>.



发件人: CCAMP [mailto:ccamp-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 Dieter Beller
发送时间: 2014年3月7日 0:15
收件人: Rajan Rao
主题: Re: [CCAMP] Raw notes available for review/comment

Hi Rao,
On 06.03.2014 17:01, Rajan Rao wrote:

Authors of 'lsp-diversity',  'uni-extensions' & 'route-exclusion-pathkey'

My question on your uses cases was the following:

How does CE know which PE to talk to for the first LSP setup?  What is the assumption?
assuming that the CE does not have any information other than the destination CE is reachable via
both PEs , it will just pick one arbitrarily.


Thx Lou for session notes.



-----Original Message-----

From: CCAMP [mailto:ccamp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Lou Berger

Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2014 1:30 PM


Subject: [CCAMP] Raw notes available for review/comment


        Please take a look at the raw minutes in etherpad (link below) and correct as you see fit.  Note these are *unreviewed/raw* notes.

Much thanks,


Link -



CCAMP mailing list




CCAMP mailing list