Re: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework
"Georgios Karagiannis" <karagian@cs.utwente.nl> Wed, 14 May 2003 07:57 UTC
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA08753 for <nsis-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Wed, 14 May 2003 03:57:48 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h4E7ODX20603 for nsis-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 14 May 2003 03:24:13 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h4E7O7B20583; Wed, 14 May 2003 03:24:07 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h4E7N5B20516 for <nsis@optimus.ietf.org>; Wed, 14 May 2003 03:23:05 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA08718 for <nsis@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 May 2003 03:56:10 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19Fr9K-0003XI-00 for nsis@ietf.org; Wed, 14 May 2003 03:58:06 -0400
Received: from utrhcs.cs.utwente.nl ([130.89.10.247]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19Fr9J-0003XF-00 for nsis@ietf.org; Wed, 14 May 2003 03:58:05 -0400
Received: from utip105 (utip105.cs.utwente.nl [130.89.13.76]) by utrhcs.cs.utwente.nl (8.12.9/8.12.9) with SMTP id h4E7xA5s006572; Wed, 14 May 2003 09:59:10 +0200 (MET DST)
Message-ID: <001c01c319ee$b4780060$4c0d5982@dynamic.cs.utwente.nl>
From: Georgios Karagiannis <karagian@cs.utwente.nl>
To: louise.burness@bt.com
Cc: nsis@ietf.org
References: <ADEC16A81CFF17489F5A2A9E1D2226DE8DCDCB@i2km41-ukdy.nat.bt.com>
Subject: Re: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework
Date: Wed, 14 May 2003 09:59:11 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: nsis-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: nsis-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: nsis@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsis>, <mailto:nsis-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: Next Steps in Signaling <nsis.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:nsis@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:nsis-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsis>, <mailto:nsis-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi Louise There might be situations that for a specific NSLP this duplication could be required. Therefore, in one of my last e-mails I mentioned that the two proposals could be combined. The NSLP that does not use the NTLP soft state management concpet could provide its own by using NSLP refresh messages. What I would also like to emphasize is that when a user is roaming and a handover take place then both NTLP and NSLP states have to be transferred to the new path. Best Regards, Georgios ----- Original Message ----- From: <louise.burness@bt.com> To: <karagian@cs.utwente.nl> Cc: <nsis@ietf.org> Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2003 5:33 PM Subject: RE: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework > Hi > > Yip, I see that point. But, might there not be other cases where this > near-functionality duplication or ability to infer information occurs? > Urgh...for example, at a guess something similar might happen when mobility > occurs and the NLTP and NSLP states might need to be moved. Efficiency gains > at this point might be much more significant. If so, then your argument will > then (correctly, but not helpfully) lead you to say that one protocol is > going to be more efficient than two > > Louise > > -----Original Message----- > From: Georgios Karagiannis [mailto:karagian@cs.utwente.nl] > Sent: 13 May 2003 15:51 > To: Farr,AL,Louise,XVR2 BURNESAL R > Cc: nsis@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework > > > Hi Louise > > One of the issues with the two layer split is that two types of states have > to be maintained: > NTLP states and NSLP states. > The NTLP states are associated with transport features, while the NSLP > states > are associated with signaling application features. > > One way of providing soft state management is by specifying completely > independent soft state management procedures for the NTLP and NSLP layers. > This means that NTLP will have to use its own NTLP refresh messages and each > NSLP protocol > that is using the NTLP layer will also have to use its own refresh messages. > This will create an unnecessary load on the network. > > The other way of providing soft state management is to only use the refresh > messages > belonging to one of the protocol levels (NTLP or NSLP). In this way the load > on the > network can be severely reduced. > > Best regards, > Georgios > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <louise.burness@bt.com> > To: <karagian@cs.utwente.nl>; <robert.hancock@roke.co.uk> > Cc: <nsis@ietf.org> > Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2003 4:02 PM > Subject: RE: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework > > > > Hi > > > > What is the actual benefit of mixing the two protocols like this? > Generally, > > its best to keep the interface and meaning between the two elements as > > simple as possible? Efficincy gains must be minimal? Is it guarenteed that > > beacuse the NTLP/ transport is still alive the NSLP still is? > > > > Louise > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Georgios Karagiannis [mailto:karagian@cs.utwente.nl] > > Sent: 13 May 2003 14:22 > > To: Hancock, Robert > > Cc: nsis@ietf.org > > Subject: Re: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework > > > > > > Hi Robert > > > > [reh] > > > > in terms of what is being discussed below, could you clarify > > > > if you see > > > > any difference in overall NSIS functionality between our two > > > > descriptions > > > > (and what this difference is). > > > > > > > > if there is no overall difference, could you explain why you > > > > prefer your > > > > split of responsibility between NSLP/NTLP. what you propose > > > > seems to me > > > > to assume a closer customisation of NTLP functionality to > > > > support one specific > > > > signalling application that I feel we should be aiming for. > > > ^^^^ > > > should be: "than" > > > > > > > [GK] > > The main difference is the following: > > * In my proposed text, the NTLP is used to provide NTLP soft state > > management, > > meaning that NTLP refresh messages are used. The NSLP is using this > > procedure > > for NSLP soft state management. If a NTLP state is not refreshed, then > > the NSLP instance > > is informed about it. Moreover, for inter-domain signaling no NSLP > > refresh > > messages are needed. Please note that a NSLP might choose to not use > the > > NTLP soft > > state management. > > > > * If I understood you correctly, in your proposed text you are in favour > of > > using > > the NSLP protocol to provide the NSLP and NTLP soft state manegement. > > Meaning that > > each NSLP will have to use its own refresh messages for providing NSLP > > and NTLP soft state > > management. > > > > In my opinion my proposed text is presenting a NTLP/NSLP soft state > > management concept that is not specific > > for one signaling application, but that is general and can be used for all > > types of signaling applications. > > Please note that this soft state management concept is similar to the soft > > state manegement concept presented > > in the Bob Braden's draft, see: > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-braden-2level-signal-arch-01.txt > > > > However, please note that these two proposals could be combined. The NSLP > > that does not use the NTLP > > soft state management concpet could provide its own by using NSLP refresh > > messages. > > > > Best regards, > > Georgios > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > nsis mailing list > > nsis@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsis > > > > _______________________________________________ > nsis mailing list > nsis@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsis > _______________________________________________ nsis mailing list nsis@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsis
- [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Hancock, Robert
- Re: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Thanh Tra LUU
- RE: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Hancock, Robert
- RE: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework maarten.buchli
- RE: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Hancock, Robert
- Re: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Georgios Karagiannis
- RE: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework john.loughney
- RE: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Hancock, Robert
- RE: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Hancock, Robert
- Re: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Georgios Karagiannis
- RE: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework john.loughney
- RE: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Hancock, Robert
- RE: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Hancock, Robert
- RE: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Hancock, Robert
- Re: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Melinda Shore
- RE: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework john.loughney
- Re: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Georgios Karagiannis
- Re: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Georgios Karagiannis
- RE: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework louise.burness
- Re: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Georgios Karagiannis
- RE: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework louise.burness
- RE: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Freytsis, Ilya
- Re: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Thanh Tra LUU
- Re: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Georgios Karagiannis
- Re: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Georgios Karagiannis
- Re: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Georgios Karagiannis
- RE: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework john.loughney
- Re: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Georgios Karagiannis
- RE: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Geib, Ruediger
- RE: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Hancock, Robert
- Re: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Georgios Karagiannis
- Re: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Georgios Karagiannis
- RE: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Geib, Ruediger
- Re: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Georgios Karagiannis
- RE: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Geib, Ruediger
- Re: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Georgios Karagiannis
- Re: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Tom Taylor
- Re: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Thanh Tra LUU
- Re: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Tom Taylor
- Re: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Georgios Karagiannis
- Re: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Thanh Tra LUU
- Re: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Tom Taylor
- Re: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Georgios Karagiannis
- Re: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Tom Taylor
- Re: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Thanh Tra LUU
- RE: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework john.loughney
- Re: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Georgios Karagiannis
- RE: [NSIS] state management and the nsis framework Hancock, Robert