Re: [Mpls-interop] Who will be in Geneva?

[Loa Andersson <[e-mail]>]

[e-mail] wrote:
> Hello.
> 
> And a node terminating a PST would be a PSTN? ;-)

that is actually true isn't it :)

/Loa
> 
> All the same, it seems much more intuitive than TC for an IETF reader.
> 
> Julien
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail]
> [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Adrian Farrel
> 
> The term that is crystallizing is "path segment tunnel" (PST)
> 
> Does that do the job?
> 
> Adrian
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Drake, John E" <[e-mail]>
> 
>> If we say that the OAM channel is associated with the containing LSP,
>> then we could have a tandem connection as currently defined (1:1 with
> an
>> LSP) while having the benefits of 1 OAM channel for N contained LSPs.
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Huub van Helvoort [mailto:[e-mail]]
>>>
>>> Hi Ben and Nurit,
>>>
>>> We definitly have to have a f-2-f discussion about TC, I think
>>> there is still some confusion.
>>>
>>>> Scalability of TC (or whatever we call it) is basically if you have
>>>> 1:1 mapping between TC and LSP. But if you have 1:n mapping TC and
>>>> many LSPs the main concern can be solved.
>>> TC is 1:1 related to a single LSP, this is how TC is defined
>>> in the Transport environment. A TC can be created either by
>>> stacking or by using the MEG level methodology (also used in
>>> the transport ethernet)
>>>
>>>> If you define TC in reasonable areas (e.g. across a domain in a
>>>> multi-domain network) and the TC aggregate multiple LSPs
>>> then IMO the
>>>> construction of TC is the cleanest one and works well with OAM and
>>>> with protection.
>>> The TC aggregate is not a TC anymore, it should IMHO be
>>> referred to as a tunnel.
>>>
>>> Cheers, Huub.
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: [e-mail]
>>>> [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of ext Ben
>>>> Niven-Jenkins
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 00:17
>>>> To: Adrian Farrel; [e-mail]
>>>> Subject: Re: [Mpls-interop] Who will be in Geneva?
>>>>
>>>> Adrian,
>>>>
>>>> On 27/11/2008 22:27, "Adrian Farrel" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>>> I ended up with a modest list of MPLS-TP design team folk
>>> willing to
>>>>> squander their evenings in Geneva working on drafts. Must
>>> be that the
>>>> Swiss
>>>>> night life is too exciting!
>>>> Or that there is no Q.Whisky in SG15 ;-)
>>>>
>>>>> Lastly, I would like to see if I can understand the issues with the
>>>> OAM
>>>>> techniques proposed. Can we continue to use TTL? Does the idea of
>>>> using
>>>>> nesting for all OAM segments really hold up? Is the OAM cart in
>>>>> danger
>>>> of
>>>>> driving the protection hobbyhorse (pardon my mixed metaphore).
>>>> I'm no OAM expert (I leave that to Tom :-) ) but I am yet to be
>>>> convinced by nesting all OAM segments for the reason that it sounds
>>>> complicated and that means to me that it will be expensive
>>> to run and
>>>> to scale.  It also sounds like I'd have to have my network
>>> constructed
>>>> in a particular way to be able to use OAM which means even
>>> in the best
>>>> run network I will at some point not be able to run OAM when
>>> I need it
>>>> (and the customer is screaming at me) because the network wasn't
>>>> constructed correctly (either by design or actual configuration !=
>>>> design).
>>>>
>>>> Ben
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Mpls-interop mailing list
>>>> [e-mail]
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls-interop
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Mpls-interop mailing list
>>>> [e-mail]
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls-interop
>>>>
>>> --
>>> ================================================================
>>>                   http://www.van-helvoort.eu/
>>> ================================================================
>>> Always remember that you are unique...just like everyone else...
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Mpls-interop mailing list
>>> [e-mail]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls-interop
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mpls-interop mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls-interop 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mpls-interop mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls-interop
> _______________________________________________
> Mpls-interop mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls-interop


-- 


Loa Andersson                         email: [e-mail]
Sr Strategy and Standards Manager            [e-mail]
Redback Networks                      phone: [phone]
An Ericsson Company
_______________________________________________
Mpls-interop mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls-interop