Re: [tsvwg] Comment on draft-bryant-rtgwg-enhanced-vpn

[Stewart Bryant <[e-mail]>]

Hi Ruediger

We will look into introducing text on this when we update the draft.

Thanks for the input.

- Stewart

On 22/03/2018 15:16, [e-mail] wrote:
>
> Hi Stewart,
>
> I didn’t read the draft. If I got your presentation at the rtgwg 
> right, draft-bryant-rtgwg-enhanced-vpn or vpn+ suggests to link 
> bandwidth to dedicated network resources. RFC 3270 introduced the 
> concept of L-LSPs.
>
> “1.3 Label-Only-Inferred- PHB Scheduling Class LSPs (L-LSP)
>
>    A separate LSP can be established for a single <FEC, Ordered 
> Aggregate> pair.  With
>
>    such LSPs, the PHB Scheduling Class is explicitly signaled at the 
> time of label
>
>    establishment, so that after label establishment, the LSR can infer
>
>    exclusively from the label value the PHB Scheduling Class to be 
> applied to a labeled
>
>    packet …..”
>
> While vpn+ might not be exactly the same, I still think the concepts 
> are closely related. I’d appreciate the proper vpn+ related draft(s) 
> to include a discussion on the similarities and the differences of 
> vpn+ as compared to the concept of L-LSPs as introduced by RFC3270. 
> And a reference to the latter, of course.
>
> As far as I can tell, the concept of linking dedicated resources 
> linked to SID values isn’t discussed by Spring for the time being. I 
> however may not be aware of all Spring related drafts and I’m happy if 
> you can provide a reference to a draft suggesting this.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ruediger
>