"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Sun, 29 March 2009 01:05 UTC

Envelope-to: ccamp-data0@psg.com
Delivery-date: Sun, 29 Mar 2009 01:57:49 +0000
Message-ID: <6174B352102046F68B5C632751CFAB17@your029b8cecfe>
Reply-To: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
From: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: <ccamp@ops.ietf.org>
Cc: "Kohei Shiomoto" <Shiomoto.Kohei@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Subject: draft-shiomoto-ccamp-switch-programming
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2009 02:05:38 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


Just a quick note on Kohei's draft draft-shiomoto-ccamp-switch-programming 
which was due to be presented in San Francisco. Unfortunately, Kohei was 
unable to travel, and I was too sick to get to the meeting.

Please have a look at the slides for the draft, and also review the draft 
itself. We have already received useful comments from Weiqiang Sun, and plan 
a new revision soon, but we would certainly welcome more comments.

In summary, the draft clarifies and summarises the RSVP-TE protocol 
exchanges with relation to the programming of cross-connects along both 
unidirectional and bidirectional LSPs. This isn't really more than a 
restatement of what can be found in existing RFCs, but we have found that 
the distribution of the necessary information has made it hard for people to 
work out what they should and should not do with their implementations. In 
particular, draft-ietf-ccamp-lsp-dppm discusses measuring setup times in 
terms of control plane behavior, and it is important to know how this 
relates to the actual availability of the LSP.