IETF Logo Mail Archive

[mpls-tp] 答复: 答复: Proposal of using GAL for PW

yang_jian@zte.com.cn Fri, 02 July 2010 01:33 UTC

Return-Path: <yang_jian@zte.com.cn>
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 6428E3A6859; Thu, 1 Jul 2010 18:33:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -92.411
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-92.411 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, CHARSET_FARAWAY_HEADER=3.2, CN_BODY_35=0.339, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, MIME_BASE64_BLANKS=0.041, MIME_BASE64_TEXT=1.753, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, RCVD_DOUBLE_IP_LOOSE=0.76, SARE_SUB_ENC_GB2312=1.345, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 CnY0uYaYW0fl; Thu, 1 Jul 2010 18:33:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx5.zte.com.cn (mx5.zte.com.cn [63.217.80.70]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6BD23A6863; Thu, 1 Jul 2010 18:33:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.30.17.99] by mx5.zte.com.cn with surfront esmtp id 552342502567411; Fri, 2 Jul 2010 09:32:45 +0800 (CST)
Received: from [10.30.3.19] by [192.168.168.15] with StormMail ESMTP id 2748.4825044117; Fri, 2 Jul 2010 09:33:13 +0800 (CST)
Received: from notes_smtp.zte.com.cn ([10.30.1.239]) by mse2.zte.com.cn with ESMTP id o621WtI1098714; Fri, 2 Jul 2010 09:32:59 +0800 (CST) (envelope-from yang_jian@zte.com.cn)
In-Reply-To: <D8D6CA70D72F44098945F2523060EFD7@cnc.intra>
To: Pei Zhang(=?GB2312?B?warNqLyvzcW8vMr1sr8=?=) <hq-zhangp@chinaunicom.cn>
X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.5.6 March 06, 2007
Message-ID: <OFB08A33D5.13F6928E-ON48257754.00087D5B-48257754.00087FD7@zte.com.cn>
From: yang_jian@zte.com.cn
Date: Fri, 2 Jul 2010 09:35:39 +0800
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on notes_smtp/zte_ltd(Release 6.5.4|March 27, 2005) at 2010-07-02 09:32:55
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=GB2312
Content-transfer-encoding: base64
X-MAIL: mse2.zte.com.cn o621WtI1098714
Cc: lihan@chinamobile.com, mpls-tp-bounces@ietf.org, pwe3@ietf.org, mpls-tp@ietf.org
Subject: [mpls-tp] =?gb2312?b?tPC4tDogILTwuLQ6ICBQcm9wb3NhbCBvZiB1c2luZyBH?= =?gb2312?b?QUwgZm9yIFBX?=
X-BeenThere: mpls-tp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
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: Fri, 02 Jul 2010 01:33:04 -0000

Yes，I also support the use of GAL on the PW considering that a CW is
optional in PW.


Jian

                                                                    
                                                                    
                                                                    





                                                                           
             Pei Zhang(联通                                                
             集团技术部)                                                   
             <hq-zhangp@chi                                         收件人 
             naunicom.cn>           "Larry" <larryli888@yahoo.com.cn>cn>,     
             发件人:                <mpls-tp@ietf.org>rg>, <pwe3@ietf.org>    
             mpls-tp-bounce                                           抄送 
             s@ietf.org             lihan@chinamobile.com                  
                                                                      主题 
                                    [mpls-tp] 答复:  Proposal of using GAL 
             2010-07-02             for PW                                 
             09:04                                                         
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           




Hi,

I agree with Han's proposal. The CW on many equipments is option in our
network.



Pei Zhang
Technology Department,
China Unicom Network Communications Group Company Limited
Mobile: +86-15601359026
E-Mail: hq-zhangp@chinaunicom.cn



-----邮件原件-----
发件人: mpls-tp-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-tp-bounces@ietf.org] 代表
Larry
发送时间: 2010年6月30日 17:38
收件人: mpls-tp@ietf.org; pwe3@ietf.org
抄送: lihan@chinamobile.com
主题: [mpls-tp] Proposal of using GAL for PW

Dear all:

    In section 4.2 in RFC5586, it is defined that GAL MUST NOT be used with
PWs in MPLS-TP. The PWE3 control word [RFC4385] MUST be present when the
ACH is used to realize the associated control channel.
    In real application, a lot of MPLS and MPLS-TP equipments do not
support control word. It is proposed to use the GAL to identify associated
control channel in PW layer.

Best regards,

                Han Li

********************************************************************
Han Li, Ph.D
China Mobile Research Institute
Unit 2, 28 Xuanwumenxi Ave, Xuanwu District, Beijing 100053, China
Fax: +86 10 63601087
MOBILE: 13501093385
********************************************************************



_______________________________________________
mpls-tp mailing list
mpls-tp@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls-tp
_______________________________________________
mpls-tp mailing list
mpls-tp@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls-tp

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email