Re: [mpls-tp] MPLS-TP identifiers clarification request

Huub van Helvoort <hhelvoort@chello.nl> Sat, 26 June 2010 20:49 UTC

Return-Path: <hhelvoort@chello.nl>
X-Original-To: mpls-tp@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls-tp@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 462283A6803 for <mpls-tp@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 26 Jun 2010 13:49:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.949
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.949 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.650, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Fmbk7oiO8ped for <mpls-tp@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 26 Jun 2010 13:49:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fep16.mx.upcmail.net (fep16.mx.upcmail.net [62.179.121.36]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02DFD3A6407 for <mpls-tp@ietf.org>; Sat, 26 Jun 2010 13:49:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from edge03.upcmail.net ([192.168.13.238]) by viefep16-int.chello.at (InterMail vM.8.01.02.02 201-2260-120-106-20100312) with ESMTP id <20100626204952.LITN26979.viefep16-int.chello.at@edge03.upcmail.net>; Sat, 26 Jun 2010 22:49:52 +0200
Received: from McAsterix.local ([77.250.51.60]) by edge03.upcmail.net with edge id akpq1e03Q1Hw6VZ03kpr5s; Sat, 26 Jun 2010 22:49:52 +0200
X-SourceIP: 77.250.51.60
Message-ID: <4C2667EE.7050403@chello.nl>
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2010 22:49:50 +0200
From: Huub van Helvoort <hhelvoort@chello.nl>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: venkatesan mahalingam <venkatflex@gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTikxLc7mZIwxC--TeLLsQjIJk3RTNTDLIpufbj4m@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTikG1k6A3Ye_-qvrViiSQjOKEPPqQmomLhKJcUgW@mail.gmail.com> <4C25D597.2090109@chello.nl> <AANLkTik5f0eoVM-84WIW7dZyzuWL_qoNRwceofluk2-G@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTik5f0eoVM-84WIW7dZyzuWL_qoNRwceofluk2-G@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Cloudmark-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=KBHyIoyMIRH440NzHl6uMYpbxJngTLC2P1JzLC/QbPg= c=1 sm=0 a=4B4i5xwAp0QA:10 a=hO-oPbc3tlwA:10 a=N659UExz7-8A:10 a=D3R9mjldFAaO_lDkKegA:9 a=2oe7y3dMsquMfcO3aBesvF6C-W0A:4 a=pILNOxqGKmIA:10 a=HpAAvcLHHh0Zw7uRqdWCyQ==:117
Cc: mpls-tp@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [mpls-tp] MPLS-TP identifiers clarification request
X-BeenThere: mpls-tp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: hhelvoort@chello.nl
List-Id: MPLS-TP Mailing list <mpls-tp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls-tp>, <mailto:mpls-tp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mpls-tp>
List-Post: <mailto:mpls-tp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mpls-tp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls-tp>, <mailto:mpls-tp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2010 20:49:46 -0000

Hello Venkat,

You replied:

> Thanks for your response. I have further query on your response [hvh]
> ICC is Global ID.
> As per BUSI ITALO response /Dated/: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 09:34:28 +0200
> An MPLS-TP enabled switch may be deployed either by a transport
> operator, who manages his network according to ITU-T operations, or by
> an IP operator, who manages his network according to IP operations.
> In the latter case, I understand that the Global_ID is likely to be used
> to identify the operator while the ICC will be used in the former case.
> If you are building an MPLS-TP switch addressing both types of operators
> you need to support both types of operators' identification.
> VM>> There is a need to keep the Global_ID and ICC for MPLS-TP operator
> identification.
> If you say, ICC is Global_ID, then what I understand is that ICC based
> transport operator identification is not required and Global_ID used by
> an IP operator alone is sufficient to identify an operator in the
> MPLS-TP network.
> Is this understanding right?

[hvh] what I tried to say is that the ICC can also be considered
a Global ID.
However the format of the IP Global ID may be different from the
transport/ICC Global ID.

So both must be supported.

> It seems that the ICC based identifiers [ICC based MEG_IDs, ICC based
> MEP_IDs etc..] for MPLS-TP in the draft
> *draft-ietf-mpls-tp-identifiers-01 *are incomplete.
> When is the next version of this draft with complete information for ICC
> based identifiers expected if the ICC is required for MPLS-TP?

[hvh] that is a question for the editors.

> If both Global_ID and ICC are required then draft authors can change the
> text of this draft as follows to identify the operator.
> MPLS-TP operator can be identified using *Operator_ID, Operator_ID
> *implies Global_ID or ICC_ID.

[hvh] good proposal.

Cheers, Huub.

-- 
================================================================
Always remember that you are unique...just like everyone else...