RE: [NSIS] Questions about draft-ietf-nsis-req-09.txt

Vishal,

see comment inline
--On Montag, 18. August 2003 08:49 +0100 "Hancock, Robert" 
<robert.hancock@roke.co.uk> wrote:

> i can make some tiny clarifications (maybe):
>
>> I had a few questions regarding the nsis req. draft
>> and would appreciate any help.
>>
>> In the following paragraph from the draft:
>>
>>   "2. Something that assists in managing state further
>> along the signaling path, the NSIS Forwarder.
>>
>>    The NSIS Forwarder does not interact with higher
>> layers, but interacts with the NSIS Initiator, NSIS
>> Responder, and possibly one or more NSIS Forwarders on
>> the signaling path, edge-to-edge or end-to-end."
>>
>>   I do not completely understand the necessity of
>> direct interactions between NSIS Forwarder with NSIS
>> Initiator and NSIS Responder. For example, in the
>> following diagram:
>>
>>   A-B-C-D-E-F
>>     | _____|
>>        |
>>      Domain
>>
>>  Assuming that A and F are NSIS Initiators and
>> Responders respectively and that B-C-D-E belong to the
>> same domain and are NSIS Forwarders for a particular
>> session. Why would C or D need to communicate with
>> either of A or F. I may be missing something important
>> here and would really appreciate if someone made it
>> clear for me.
>
> [reh] in these cases, the interactions may be with neighbour
> NEs only (C talks to B which talks to A).
>

Here it is going to be very design specific. For example, an error message 
or notification, could be directly send from D to A. But this has some 
security implication we are trying to sort out in the framework draft and 
the NTLP design.

>>
>> In the following paragraph from the draft:
>>
>>   "6. NSIS assumes layer 3 routing and the
>> determination of next data node selection is not done
>> by NSIS."
>>
>> Would this requirement have to change in any way if we
>> decide to allow the NSIS Initiator some (partial or
>> complete) control over the path through which the data
>> for a particular session must flow?
>
> [reh] the node with NI functionality could do this, but
> it would not be part of NSIS functionality to specify how.
> In other words, there could be node implementations which
> coordinate routing and signalling, but this doesn't alter
> the signalling requirement.
>

Basically, the paragraph restricts to path-coupled signaling, where follows 
the data path. With any implementation of tight integration of routing and 
signaling you can achieve any behaviour you want for a limited part of the 
network.

[...]

Marcus

_______________________________________________
nsis mailing list
nsis@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsis