IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mpls] working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-p2mp-framework

Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> Sun, 17 November 2013 14:55 UTC

Return-Path: <lberger@labn.net>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F88711E8DB6 for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 17 Nov 2013 06:55:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.215
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.215 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.216, BAYES_50=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AyDajyxhyITm for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 17 Nov 2013 06:55:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alt-proxy6.mail.unifiedlayer.com (alt-proxy6.mail.unifiedlayer.com [66.147.245.65]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id EFB2B11E8194 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Sun, 17 Nov 2013 06:55:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 4245 invoked by uid 0); 17 Nov 2013 14:55:25 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO box313.bluehost.com) (69.89.31.113) by oproxy19.mail.unifiedlayer.com with SMTP; 17 Nov 2013 14:55:25 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=labn.net; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:MIME-Version:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Date:CC:To:From; bh=krVBo3fp3gZ6W+OJsEfhFnIj1F1qqQtotHb9l1BHx9M=; b=hqFQzMXU8eXuGMYaQlTaAzBs3xjD/Y1r5PSYHblrwImYeOVrAKaIDA2Lkc4l/tTEdmn11rm3H6A9a4S7FY1m1nxTKDPOWoVNhCjxkHsKBGOyH+jKo4V9HeshMvMSKqJ4;
Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113]:46982 helo=[127.0.0.1]) by box313.bluehost.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <lberger@labn.net>) id 1Vi3kz-0004Wj-4j; Sun, 17 Nov 2013 07:55:25 -0700
From: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
To: Gregory Mirsky <gregory.mirsky@ericsson.com>, Zhenlong Cui <c-sai@bx.jp.nec.com>, mpls@ietf.org
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2013 09:55:23 -0500
Message-ID: <142668f1390.2764.9b4188e636579690ba6c69f2c8a0f1fd@labn.net>
In-Reply-To: <7347100B5761DC41A166AC17F22DF1121B713560@eusaamb103.ericsson.se>
References: <5260B904.2090802@pi.nu> <015a01cecf07$abeefcd0$03ccf670$@bx.jp.nec.com> <52771FCD.1030406@labn.net> <00c701ced93b$d04fed80$70efc880$@bx.jp.nec.com> <52794190.9060303@labn.net> <527D51B6.1060106@labn.net> <097b01cee12f$d1590df0$740b29d0$@bx.jp.nec.com> <5284F610.6050807@labn.net> <00a201cee1ac$3c2efd20$b48cf760$@bx.jp.nec.com> <52863FA2.1070604@labn.net> <7347100B5761DC41A166AC17F22DF1121B713560@eusaamb103.ericsson.se>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:9.0) Gecko/20111222 Thunderbird/9.0.1 AquaMail/1.2.5.10 (build: 2100360)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Identified-User: {1038:box313.bluehost.com:labnmobi:labn.net} {sentby:smtp auth 69.89.31.113 authed with lberger@labn.net}
Cc: draft-ietf-mpls-tp-p2mp-framework@tools.ietf.org
Subject: Re: [mpls] working group last call on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-p2mp-framework
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/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: Sun, 17 Nov 2013 14:55:39 -0000

Greg,


Thanks for the comment.  See below.


On November 15, 2013 4:25:17 PM Gregory Mirsky 
<gregory.mirsky@ericsson.com> wrote:
> Hi Lou,
> I've got confused with use of ME in
> Which will result in:
>      All the traffic sent over a P2MP transport path, including
>      OAM packets generated by a MEP, is sent (multicast) from the
>      root towards all the leaves, and thus may be processed by all
>      the MEs in a P2MP MEG.
>
> Maintenance Entity (ME) is association of two or more MEPs. Perhaps it 
> should be "by all Maintenance Points (MPs) in a P2MP MEG" since in MPLS-TP 
> MEG consists of only one ME and thus both terms can be used interchangeably.
>

How about being completely explicit:
    ...by all MIPs and MEPs associated with a P2MP MEG".

Lou
> 	Regards,
> 		Greg
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email