[mpls-tp] WG LC draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal-in-pw-00.txt

[Greg Mirsky <[e-mail]>]

Dear Authors and All,
prior to the meeting in Bejing and acceptance of this proposal as WG
document Luca and I agreed that use of GAL with PW VCCV presents a problem.
I was not attending the IETF-79, nor I found discussion of this issue in the
minutes. I think that this issue should be specified, explained. In my view,
this document updates not only RFC 5586
but RFC 5085 too.

Regards,
Greg

Comment to draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal-in-pw-00.txt

On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 10:14 AM, Luca Martini <[e-mail]> wrote:

>  Greg,
>
> You are correct , the proposed update does not propose any changes to VCCV.
> However the problem with vccv is not as simple as to ask for a new code
> point from IANA.
> Given the good amount of discussion on this point, we should probably have
> a discussion in Beijing.
>
> Luca
>
>
>
> On 10/29/2010 05:07 PM, Greg Mirsky wrote:
>
> Dear Authors,
> I think that proposed update of the Section 4.2. RFC 5586 makes it possible
> to use GAL on MPLS-TP PW that uses Control Word. I consider it to be
> conflict between PW VCCV CC types because use of GAL is not negotiated
> through PW VCCV negotiation. To avoid such situation I propose:
>
>    - in Section 5 request IANA to assign new CC Type "MPLS Generic
>    Associated Channel Label"
>    - assign precedence to new CC Type that affects Section 7 RFC 5085
>
> Regards,
> Greg
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing [e-mail]://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
>
>
>