IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mpls-tp] [mpls] MPLS-TP management overview draft - draft-farrel-mpls-tp-mib-management-overview

Thomas Nadeau <tnadeau@lucidvision.com> Thu, 08 July 2010 19:43 UTC

Return-Path: <tnadeau@lucidvision.com>
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 DAF6C3A68C0; Thu, 8 Jul 2010 12:43:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.298
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.298 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
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 9s1-sFINBMZQ; Thu, 8 Jul 2010 12:43:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lucidvision.com (lucidvision.com [72.71.250.34]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB38F3A685A; Thu, 8 Jul 2010 12:43:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.133] (unknown [72.71.250.36]) by lucidvision.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6A095AD7BF; Thu, 8 Jul 2010 15:43:32 -0400 (EDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-3--336698879
From: Thomas Nadeau <tnadeau@lucidvision.com>
In-Reply-To: <C0AC8FAB6849AB4FADACCC70A949E2F1053B72289E@EUSAACMS0701.eamcs.ericsson.se>
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2010 15:43:31 -0400
Message-Id: <0D0FBB3D-8C67-44E6-BDCA-D757A62E43FF@lucidvision.com>
References: <C0AC8FAB6849AB4FADACCC70A949E2F1053B72289E@EUSAACMS0701.eamcs.ericsson.se>
To: Eric Gray <eric.gray@ericsson.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081)
Cc: A S Kiran Koushik <kkoushik@cisco.com>, Daniel King <daneil@olddog.co.uk>, Venkatesan Mahalingam <venkatesan.mahalingam@aricent.com>, "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, "mpls-tp@ietf.org" <mpls-tp@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mpls-tp] [mpls] MPLS-TP management overview draft - draft-farrel-mpls-tp-mib-management-overview
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: Thu, 08 Jul 2010 19:43:30 -0000

	Why are we including GMPLS-related MIBs in this?  I'd like to not confuse the fact that the basic version of TP is supposed to be static, and handled (managed) as such. If you do talk about GMPLS MIBs in there, then I'd like to be very clear that it is optional.

	--Tom


> Authors, 
>  
>     Some comments on your draft...
>  
>     As a general comment, in addition to the MIBs already explicitly referenced in this draft, you should probably  
> include:
>  
> o RFC 4801 ( "Definitions of Textual Conventions for Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Management " ),
> o RFC 4802 ("Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Traffic Engineering Management Information Base"),
> o RFC 4220 ("Traffic Engineering Link Management Information Base");
>  
> As is, there is a curious dearth of MIB references for GMPLS related MIBs, given GMPLS will be the signaling
> method used for MPLS-TP LSPs. 
>  
>

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email