IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [PWE3] Working group last call and IPR call for dynamic Multi-Segment PW drafts

"Bocci, Matthew (Matthew)" <matthew.bocci@alcatel-lucent.com> Tue, 02 October 2012 09:25 UTC

Return-Path: <matthew.bocci@alcatel-lucent.com>
X-Original-To: pwe3@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pwe3@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88F6221F8B06 for <pwe3@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Oct 2012 02:25:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -107.711
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-107.711 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.462, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rpPp+ivIOw6r for <pwe3@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Oct 2012 02:25:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smail2.alcatel.fr (smail2.alcatel.fr [62.23.212.57]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E083C21F8B05 for <pwe3@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Oct 2012 02:25:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from FRMRSSXCHHUB01.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com (FRMRSSXCHHUB01.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com [135.120.45.61]) by smail2.alcatel.fr (8.14.3/8.14.3/ICT) with ESMTP id q929MLuh009798 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT); Tue, 2 Oct 2012 11:25:03 +0200
Received: from FRMRSSXCHMBSA3.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.35]) by FRMRSSXCHHUB01.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.61]) with mapi; Tue, 2 Oct 2012 11:24:49 +0200
From: "Bocci, Matthew (Matthew)" <matthew.bocci@alcatel-lucent.com>
To: Wen Lin <wlin@juniper.net>, "pwe3@ietf.org" <pwe3@ietf.org>
Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2012 11:24:47 +0200
Thread-Topic: [PWE3] Working group last call and IPR call for dynamic Multi-Segment PW drafts
Thread-Index: Ac2gf8UxAWj3YJVoR+GTJJvgMuyJQA==
Message-ID: <CC906F1A.359DF%matthew.bocci@alcatel-lucent.com>
In-Reply-To: <DF7F294AF4153D498141CBEFADB17704C7EBF0A08E@EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.4.120824
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.69 on 155.132.188.80
Subject: Re: [PWE3] Working group last call and IPR call for dynamic Multi-Segment PW drafts
X-BeenThere: pwe3@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Pseudo Wires Edge to Edge <pwe3.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/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: Tue, 02 Oct 2012 09:25:08 -0000

Wen,

Thanks for your comment. I am not sure why sending or processing a route
target would be mandatory in the case of MS-PW routing. This is somewhat
different from the auto-discovery case described in RFC6074. In MS-PW
routing, you know a-priori the PEs that can participate in MS-PW routing
and can terminate MS-PWs, the set of PSN tunnel between T-Pes/S-Pes, and
the T-LDP next-hop.

Regards

Matthew   

On 05/09/2012 20:40, "Wen Lin" <wlin@juniper.net> wrote:

>When BGP is used for advertising PW address information, I think we shall
>specify in the section 6.1.3 that it MUST have one or more route targets
>associated with it since the NRLI is for L2VPN with a an AFI equals to
>L2VPN(25).
>
>Thanks,
>Wen
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>pwe3 mailing list
>pwe3@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3

v2.29.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status