[L1vpn] CE-CE control message
Tomonori TAKEDA <takeda.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp> Tue, 11 July 2006 22:21 UTC
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G0QbU-0005gW-4M; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 18:21:16 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G0QUK-0003zv-9j for l1vpn@ietf.org; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 18:13:52 -0400
Received: from cronos.ocn.ne.jp ([222.146.51.136] helo=smtp.cronos.ocn.ne.jp) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G0QFE-0002sC-J4 for l1vpn@ietf.org; Tue, 11 Jul 2006 17:58:17 -0400
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (unknown [132.219.16.219]) by smtp.cronos.ocn.ne.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DACE1A89 for <l1vpn@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Jul 2006 06:58:14 +0900 (JST)
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2006 06:58:10 +0900
From: Tomonori TAKEDA <takeda.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp>
To: l1vpn@ietf.org
Message-Id: <20060712064755.493E.TAKEDA.TOMONORI@lab.ntt.co.jp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Becky! ver. 2.20.07 [ja]
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: ea4ac80f790299f943f0a53be7e1a21a
Cc:
Subject: [L1vpn] CE-CE control message
X-BeenThere: l1vpn@lists.ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: takeda.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp
List-Id: Layer 1 Virtual Private Networks <l1vpn.lists.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l1vpn>, <mailto:l1vpn-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/l1vpn>
List-Post: <mailto:l1vpn@lists.ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:l1vpn-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l1vpn>, <mailto:l1vpn-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: l1vpn-bounces@lists.ietf.org
Hi, As John raised the issue in the meeting, I think we need to make sure that CE-CE control message exchange are corrected captured. We have a specific section on this in the framework and requirement draft. http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-l1vpn-framework-03.txt ---------------------------- 10. Control Plane Connectivity between CEs. A customer network connected by VPN connections may be controlled by MPLS or GMPLS, and the VPN connections may be treated as TE links within the customer network. In such cases, there must be control plane (IP level) connectivity between the CEs, so that control messages, such as signaling and routing messages, can be exchanged between the CEs. Furthermore, in some recovery techniques, Notify message exchange is needed between the ingress and egress of the VPN connection, which requires control plane connectivity between the CEs. There are several potential ways to achieve this. ... ---------------------------- This I-D has already passed the WG last call and is now under AD evaluation. If you have any comment, please let me know. Thanks, Tomonori _______________________________________________ L1vpn mailing list L1vpn@lists.ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l1vpn
- [L1vpn] CE-CE control message Tomonori TAKEDA