l2vpn framework issue

Eric Rosen <erosen@cisco.com> Tue, 29 July 2003 17:10 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA01182 for <l2vpn-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Jul 2003 13:10:32 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19hXzE-0003Re-D7 for l2vpn-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 29 Jul 2003 13:10:08 -0400
Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id h6THA85M013236 for l2vpn-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 29 Jul 2003 13:10:08 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19hXzE-0003RP-9W for l2vpn-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 29 Jul 2003 13:10:08 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA01163 for <l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Jul 2003 13:10:01 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19hXzC-00004x-00 for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 29 Jul 2003 13:10:06 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19hXzB-00004t-00 for l2vpn-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 29 Jul 2003 13:10:05 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19hXz7-0003Qw-R8; Tue, 29 Jul 2003 13:10:01 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19hXyQ-0003QP-79 for l2vpn@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 29 Jul 2003 13:09:18 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA01145 for <l2vpn@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Jul 2003 13:09:11 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19hXyO-00004S-00 for l2vpn@ietf.org; Tue, 29 Jul 2003 13:09:16 -0400
Received: from sj-iport-2-in.cisco.com ([171.71.176.71] helo=sj-iport-2.cisco.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19hXyN-00003s-00 for l2vpn@ietf.org; Tue, 29 Jul 2003 13:09:15 -0400
Received: from cisco.com (64.102.124.13) by sj-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 29 Jul 2003 10:11:26 -0700
Received: from cisco.com (erosen-u10.cisco.com [161.44.70.36]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.9/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h6TH8hAi029759; Tue, 29 Jul 2003 13:08:43 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <200307291708.h6TH8hAi029759@rtp-core-2.cisco.com>
To: l2vpn@ietf.org
Subject: l2vpn framework issue
Reply-to: erosen@cisco.com
User-Agent: EMH/1.14.1 SEMI/1.14.3 (Ushinoya) FLIM/1.14.3 (Unebigoryƍmae) APEL/10.3 Emacs/21.3 (sparc-sun-solaris2.8) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.3 - "Ushinoya")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2003 13:08:43 -0400
From: Eric Rosen <erosen@cisco.com>
Sender: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: l2vpn-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l2vpn>, <mailto:l2vpn-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: <l2vpn.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:l2vpn@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:l2vpn-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l2vpn>, <mailto:l2vpn-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>

Awhile back  we had a  discussion of  the VPLS model  in this doc,  but that
discussion is not reflected in draft-ietf-l2vpn-l2-framework-00.txt which is
now being last called. 

My proposal  is to add the  following text at  the end of section  2.2 (just
before  section  2.2.1).  I  think  this  text does  the  proper  job for  a
framework document,  i.e., places the  controversial issue in  context while
leaving the resolution of the controversy to the solutions work. 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   This framework specifies that each "bridge module" has a single
   "Emulated LAN interface".  It does not specify the number of bridge
   modules that a VPLS-PE may contain, nor does it specify the number of
   VPLS instances which may attach to a bridge module over a single
   "Emulated LAN interface".

   Thus the framework is compatible with at least the following three
   models:

     - Model 1

       A VPLS-PE contains a single bridge module, and supports a single
       VPLS instance.  The VPLS instance is an Emulated LAN; if that
       Emulated LAN contains VLANs, 802.1Q tagging must be used to
       indicate which packets are in which VLANs.

     - Model 2

       A VPLS-PE contains a single bridge module, but supports multiple
       VPLS instances.  Each VPLS instance is thought of as a VLAN (in
       effect, an "Emulated VLAN"), and the set of VPLS instances are
       treated as a set of VLANs on a common LAN.

     - Model 3

       A VPLS-PE contains an arbitrary number of bridge modules, each of
       which attaches to a single VPLS instance.

   There may be other models as well, some of which are combinations of
   the 3 models above.  Different models may have different
   characteristics, and different scopes of applicability.

   Each VPLS solution should specify the model or models that it is
   supporting.

   This framework does not specify the way in which bridge control
   protocols are used on the Emulated LANs.