IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [PWE3] VCCV usage

"Aissaoui, Mustapha (Mustapha)" <mustapha.aissaoui@alcatel-lucent.com> Thu, 18 November 2010 22:12 UTC

Return-Path: <mustapha.aissaoui@alcatel-lucent.com>
X-Original-To: pwe3@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pwe3@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0469B3A6403 for <pwe3@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 14:12:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.400, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 GXK2vcVqkjTy for <pwe3@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 14:12:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ihemail1.lucent.com (ihemail1.lucent.com [135.245.0.33]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBBEA28C12A for <pwe3@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 14:12:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from usnavsmail4.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com (usnavsmail4.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com [135.3.39.12]) by ihemail1.lucent.com (8.13.8/IER-o) with ESMTP id oAIMD55U027857 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 18 Nov 2010 16:13:05 -0600 (CST)
Received: from USNAVSXCHHUB03.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com (usnavsxchhub03.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com [135.3.39.112]) by usnavsmail4.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/GMO) with ESMTP id oAIMD4d5006327 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT); Thu, 18 Nov 2010 16:13:05 -0600
Received: from USNAVSXCHMBSC2.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.3.39.147]) by USNAVSXCHHUB03.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.3.39.112]) with mapi; Thu, 18 Nov 2010 16:13:04 -0600
From: "Aissaoui, Mustapha (Mustapha)" <mustapha.aissaoui@alcatel-lucent.com>
To: "neil.2.harrison@bt.com" <neil.2.harrison@bt.com>, "cpignata@cisco.com" <cpignata@cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 16:13:03 -0600
Thread-Topic: [PWE3] VCCV usage
Thread-Index: AcuF/Gw00sZd7Xv4R8+CrpTrRYWlewAZ3qGAACPz7YAAHnLToA==
Message-ID: <5DF53972F7E9134782DCE51624466FE50ACFB513AF@USNAVSXCHMBSC2.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com>
References: <C9087057.3B57%matthew.bocci@alcatel-lucent.com> <4CE2D8A4.4010903@cisco.com> <5DF53972F7E9134782DCE51624466FE50ACFB50E62@USNAVSXCHMBSC2.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com> <960EC8F9A775AB40BF58D8953342D86303281232@XMB-RCD-206.cisco.com> <5DF53972F7E9134782DCE51624466FE50ACFB50EAE@USNAVSXCHMBSC2.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com> <7A808A63-83FA-4B97-9AC8-7A09A2297FB0@cisco.com> <5DF53972F7E9134782DCE51624466FE50ACFB51070@USNAVSXCHMBSC2.ndc.alcatel-lucent.com> <6D3D47CB84BDE349BC23BF1C94E316E44002026A7E@EMV62-UKRD.domain1.systemhost.net>
In-Reply-To: <6D3D47CB84BDE349BC23BF1C94E316E44002026A7E@EMV62-UKRD.domain1.systemhost.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 135.245.2.33
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.64 on 135.3.39.12
Cc: "lmartini@cisco.com" <lmartini@cisco.com>, "yaakov_s@rad.com" <yaakov_s@rad.com>, "pwe3@ietf.org" <pwe3@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [PWE3] VCCV usage
X-BeenThere: pwe3@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Pseudo Wires Edge to Edge <pwe3.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3>, <mailto:pwe3-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pwe3>
List-Post: <mailto:pwe3@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pwe3-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3>, <mailto:pwe3-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 22:12:22 -0000

Neil,
This is specifically about the control plane signaling of VCCV capability in a MS-PW. So, these apply to S-PE nodes where two segments of a MS-PW are stitched.

Mustapha. 

-----Original Message-----
From: neil.2.harrison@bt.com [mailto:neil.2.harrison@bt.com] 
Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 1:39 PM
To: Aissaoui, Mustapha (Mustapha); cpignata@cisco.com
Cc: pwe3@ietf.org; yaakov_s@rad.com; lmartini@cisco.com
Subject: RE: [PWE3] VCCV usage

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: pwe3-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:pwe3-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf 
> Of Aissaoui, Mustapha (Mustapha)
> Sent: 17 November 2010 19:41
> To: Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)
> Cc: pwe3@ietf.org; Yaakov Stein; Luca Martini (lmartini)
> Subject: Re: [PWE3] VCCV usage
> 
> Carlos,
> I meant to say the VCCV capability options must be agreed upon by all 
> nodes in the path of the MS-PW as explained in the draft.
NH=> The *nodes* in which layer network?  And how does one know which layer network one is in from looking only at the DP information?  Will this apply to both MPLS and MPLS-TP?

regards, Neil

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status