IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mpls] Term "PSC" in draft-ietf-mpls-tp-linear-protection-01

Alexander Vainshtein <Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com> Wed, 24 March 2010 08:30 UTC

Return-Path: <Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com>
X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E09F93A676A; Wed, 24 Mar 2010 01:30:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.132
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.132 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, DNS_FROM_OPENWHOIS=1.13, 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 rCw54SvpBfBM; Wed, 24 Mar 2010 01:30:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ilptbmg01.ecitele.com (ilptbmg01-out.ecitele.com [147.234.242.234]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43D473A67F7; Wed, 24 Mar 2010 01:30:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: 93eaf2e7-b7b62ae000003814-f5-4ba9cb734c39
Received: from ILPTEXCH02.ecitele.com ( [147.234.245.181]) by ilptbmg01.ecitele.com (Symantec Brightmail Gateway) with SMTP id F2.90.14356.37BC9AB4; Wed, 24 Mar 2010 10:21:07 +0200 (IST)
Received: from ILPTMAIL02.ecitele.com ([147.234.244.213]) by ILPTEXCH02.ecitele.com ([147.234.245.181]) with mapi; Wed, 24 Mar 2010 10:30:23 +0200
From: Alexander Vainshtein <Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com>
To: Vivien Sterling <vivien.sterling@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 10:30:22 +0200
Thread-Topic: [mpls] Term "PSC" in draft-ietf-mpls-tp-linear-protection-01
Thread-Index: AcrLKvolOu7lBQSqT1ut2i2ehMfvzAAADAyQ
Message-ID: <A3C5DF08D38B6049839A6F553B331C76C1078FB66E@ILPTMAIL02.ecitele.com>
References: <8bf39341003231036w3ceaac70l18ee403c034da761@mail.gmail.com> <8bf39341003240120r554b72j3f6b924475a11d3c@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <8bf39341003240120r554b72j3f6b924475a11d3c@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_A3C5DF08D38B6049839A6F553B331C76C1078FB66EILPTMAIL02eci_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA==
Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, "CCAMP@ietf.org" <CCAMP@ietf.org>, "mpls-tp@ietf.org" <mpls-tp@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Term "PSC" in draft-ietf-mpls-tp-linear-protection-01
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mpls>
List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 08:30:11 -0000

Vivien and all,
AFAIK, PSC stands for "Protection State Coordination" in the MPLS-TP parlance (see MPLS-TP Survivability Framework<http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-tp-survive-fwk/>) - a new fancy name for what has been known as "APS Protocol" in SONET/SDH.

As you've noted, it has a completely different meaning in GMPLS.

Since GMPLS is going to be used with MPLS-TP, double usage of this acronym looks highly problematic.

Regards,
     Sasha

From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Vivien Sterling
Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2010 10:21 AM
To: CCAMP@ietf.org; mpls@ietf.org; mpls-tp@ietf.org
Subject: [mpls] Term "PSC" in draft-ietf-mpls-tp-linear-protection-01

Dear Experts,

I'm surprised to find the term "PSC" used in this draft. I suppose the authors are talking about data plane not control plane, right? Isn't PSC in GMPLS elaborated as "Packet Switch Capable" ? It's confusing :-(

--
Cheers,
Vivien

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email