Re: [mpls] Last Call: <draft-ietf-mpls-tp-use-cases-and-design-06.txt>

["Luyuan Fang (lufang)" <[e-mail]>]

Works for me. Thanks, Paul.
Luyuan

-----Original Message-----
From: <Doolan>, "Paul   (NSN - US/Irving)" <[e-mail]>
Date: Tuesday, April 2, 2013 7:58 AM
To: Luyuan Fang <[e-mail]>, Russ Housley <[e-mail]>,
"[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
Cc: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [mpls] Last Call:
<draft-ietf-mpls-tp-use-cases-and-design-06.txt>

>Hi Luyuan,
>
>You wrote (in part):
>
>......since multiplexing of bursty sources is far more efficient over
>traditional circuit-based
>TDM technologies.
>
>Which is not true and probably not what you meant.
>
>A better formulation might be "since packet multiplexing of traffic from
>bursty sources provides more efficient use of bandwidth than traditional
>circuit-based TDM technologies".
>
>To be honest however, I'd cut the traditional and use only TDM (since
>some 'circuit' based technologies also offer packet multiplexing) so I'd
>reduce it to:
>
>A better formulation might be "since packet multiplexing of traffic from
>bursty sources provides more efficient use of bandwidth than TDM
>technologies".
>
>
>cheers,
>pd
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of
>ext Luyuan Fang (lufang)
>Sent: Monday, April 01, 2013 9:05 PM
>To: Russ Housley; [e-mail]
>Cc: [e-mail]
>Subject: Re: [mpls] Last Call:
><draft-ietf-mpls-tp-use-cases-and-design-06.txt>
>
>Hi Russ,
>
>Thanks for your comments, very good points.
>Sorry for the delay in replying, I was out of office.
>
> 
>The following is my proposed text for replacing the current first
>paragraph of section 1.2.
>
> 
>Traditional transport technologies include SONET/SDH, TDM, and ATM. There
>is a transition away from these transport technologies to new packet
>technologies.
>In addition to the ever increasing demand for bandwidth, the packet
>technologies offer these key advantages:
>
> 
>Bandwidth efficiency: Transport technologies supports fixed Bandwidth
>only, no packet statistical multiplexing, bandwidth is reserved in
>transport
>whether used or not by clients. Packet technologies support statistical
>multiplexing,
>this is the most important motivation for the transition from traditional
>transport technologies to packet technologies. The proliferation of new
>distributed applications which communicate with servers over the network
>in a
>bursty fashion has been driving the adoption of packet transport
>techniques, since
>multiplexing of bursty sources is far more efficient over traditional
>circuit-based
>TDM technologies.
>
> 
>Flexible data rate connections: Traditional transport connection
>granularity
>is limited to the rigid PDH or SONET hierarchy (e.g., DS1, DS3, OC3, OC12,
>etc.).
>Packet technologies support flexible data rate connections. The support of
>finer data rate granularity is important for today¹s wireline and wireless
>services and applications.
>
> 
>QoS support: While traditional transport, such as TDM transport has
>very limited QoS support, packet transport can provide needed QoS
>treatment for
>IPTV, Voice and Video over IP applications.
>
> 
>The root cause for transport moving to packet transport is the shift
>of application from TDM to packet. For example, Voice TDM to VoIP; Video
>to
>Video over IP; TDM access lines to Ethernet; TDM VPNs to IP VPNs and
>Ethernet
>VPNs. In addition, network convergence and technology refreshes demand for
>common and flexible infrastructure that provides multiple services.
>
> 
>Thanks,
>Luyuan
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Russ Housley <[e-mail]>
>Date: Saturday, March 23, 2013 3:16 PM
>To: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
>Cc: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
>Subject: Re: [mpls] Last
>Call:	<draft-ietf-mpls-tp-use-cases-and-design-06.txt>
>
>>I wonder if the direction of Section 1.2 can be revised to make it more
>>of an engineering document.
>>
>>It currently says:
>>
>>   In recent years, the urgency for moving from traditional transport
>>   technologies, such as SONET/SDH, TDM, and ATM, to new packet
>>   technologies has been rising. This is largely due to the fast growing
>>   demand for bandwidth, which has been fueled by the following factors:
>>   ...
>>
>>Please consider an approach that describes the the reasons behind the
>>transition from the network operator and network user perspectives:
>>
>>   Traditional transport technologies include SONET/SDH, TDM, and ATM.
>>   There is a transition away from these transport technologies to new
>>   packet technologies. In addition to the ever increasing demand for
>>   bandwidth, the packet technologies offer these advantages:
>>   ...
>>
>>The fact that IP networks are being used for new applications and that
>>the legacy devices are getting old does not motivate the transition to
>>packet technologies.  The advantages that packet technologies offer for
>>these new applications is the thing that needs to be highlighted here,
>>even if it is just a list of bullets.
>>
>>It seems like the only sentence that addresses this point in Section 1.2
>>is: "It streamlines the operation, reduces the overall complexity, and
>>improves end-to-end convergence."
>>
>>Thanks,
>>  Russ
>>
>>On Jan 28, 2013, at 3:01 PM, The IESG wrote:
>>
>>> The IESG has received a request from the Multiprotocol Label Switching
>>>WG
>>> (mpls) to consider the following document:
>>> - 'MPLS-TP Applicability; Use Cases and Design'
>>>  <draft-ietf-mpls-tp-use-cases-and-design-06.txt> as Informational RFC
>>> 
>>> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
>>> final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
>>> [e-mail] mailing lists by 2013-02-11. Exceptionally, comments may
>>>be
>>> sent to [e-mail] instead. In either case, please retain the
>>> beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
>>> 
>>> Abstract
>>> 
>>>   This document provides applicability, use case studies and network
>>>   design considerations for the Multiprotocol Label Switching Transport
>>>   Profile (MPLS-TP). The use cases include Metro Ethernet access and
>>>   aggregation transport, Mobile backhaul, and packet optical transport.
>>> 
>>> The file can be obtained via
>>> 
>>>http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-tp-use-cases-and-design/
>>> 
>>> IESG discussion can be tracked via
>>> 
>>>http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-tp-use-cases-and-design/
>>>b
>>>allot/
>>> 
>>> 
>>> No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>mpls mailing list
>>[e-mail]
>>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
>