[Mpls-interop] PST question: Was (Re: Who will be in Geneva?)

Renaming the thread - a little late but anyway ...

at risk asking the obvious, since I'm still reading through the
thread?

Nurit,

In your figure will the S-PEs label swap the label on
E2E tunnels LSP? Or is the same label showing up at the
second T-PE?

/Loa

Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon) wrote:
> Hi,
> I agree that we need to find a better name......
> What about the figure in the second slide of the attached?
> If multiple LSPs transmit via the same physical path in the first domain
> and have the same constraints, why cannot we aggregate them and run OAM
> per the aggregated in the first domain?
> Best regards,
> Nurit
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Adrian Farrel [mailto:adrian@olddog.co.uk] 
> Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2008 11:20
> To: hhelvoort@chello.nl; Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon)
> Cc: ext Ben Niven-Jenkins; mpls-interop@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Mpls-interop] Who will be in Geneva?
> 
> Hi Huub.
> 
>> The TC aggregate is not a TC anymore, it should IMHO be referred
>> to as a tunnel.
> 
> Yes!
> 
> Which is not to say that it is not a useful construct for reducing OAM 
> overhead.
> 
> I think (OK, I know) that I suggested we avoid using the TC language as
> I 
> thought we would find it unhelpful. Perhaps when we meet to go through
> this, 
> we can draw pictures and work out the language later?
> 
> A 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mpls-interop mailing list
> Mpls-interop@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls-interop

-- 

Loa Andersson                         email: loa.andersson@redback.com
Sr Strategy and Standards Manager            loa@pi.nu
Redback Networks                      phone: +46 8 632 77 14
An Ericsson Company
_______________________________________________
Mpls-interop mailing list
Mpls-interop@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls-interop