Re: [mpls] [PWE3] IETF Last Call comment on draft-ietf-pwe3-gal-in-pw

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Dear Yaakov and Sasha,
I share your concern in regard to MPLS-TP-ness of MS-PW construct. It
was in my background thinking when I was querying Sasha and I think
that the "chimera" is quite proper characterization for MS-PW in
MPLS-TP.

Regards,
Greg

On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 9:07 AM, Alexander Vainshtein
<Alexander.Vainshtein@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Yaakov,
> You've written
>
> PW that starts in an MPLS-TP domain, can easily leak into a non-TP domain
>
> This is exactly the point that I've raised in my IETF LC comment on the
> draft (for MS-PW) - please see my email (to several lists) that explains
> that in some detail, at
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pwe3/current/msg12581.html.
>
> Regards,
>      Sasha
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: mpls-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mpls-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Yaakov
> Stein [yaakov_s@xxxxxxx]
> Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2011 5:37 PM
> To: stbryant@xxxxxxxxx; Luca Martini; IETF Discussion
> Cc: mpls@xxxxxxxx; pwe3; iesg@xxxxxxxx; pwe3-chairs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [mpls] [PWE3] IETF Last Call comment on
> draft-ietf-pwe3-gal-in-pw
>
> Stewart
>
>
>
> Was this email meant to address my email to the IETF discussion list (from
> Tues 16 Aug)
>
> or just the discussion on MPLS and PWE lists ?
>
>
>
> It does to SOME extent, as it leaves open the possibility of the GAL not
> being at BoS;
>
> but it does not rule out that possibility either.
>
>
>
> However, you did not address my other final comment that a PW that starts in
> an MPLS-TP domain,
>
> can easily leak into a non-TP domain.
>
> What does one do then ?
>
>
>
> (My email also identified a wording issue and what I consider to be a
> completely inaccurate
>
> explanation of what the draft is trying to accomplish.)
>
>
>
> Y(J)S
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: pwe3-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:pwe3-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> Stewart Bryant
> Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2011 15:05
> To: Luca Martini; IETF Discussion
> Cc: ietf@xxxxxxxx; Vladimir Kleiner; mpls@xxxxxxxx; Idan Kaspit; Mishael
> Wexler; pwe3; iesg@xxxxxxxx; Oren Gal; John Shirron;
> pwe3-chairs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Rotem Cohen
> Subject: Re: [PWE3] [mpls] IETF Last Call comment on
> draft-ietf-pwe3-gal-in-pw
>
>
>
> Reviewing this discussion there are three components.
>
> 1) The update of RFC5586 to allow PW to use the GAL.
> 2) The PW OAM application that is to use the GAL.
> 3) The label stack structure when  teh GAL is used with a PW
>
> This draft is only concerned with point 1 above. Points
> 2 and 3 need to be resolved in any PWE3 draft that describes
> the use of the GAL.
>
> To that end the text in draft-ietf-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal-in-pw-01
>
> ========
>
>  -  Section 4.2. (GAL Applicability and Usage) in [RFC5586], the
>
>       original text:
>
>
>
>           In MPLS-TP, the GAL MUST be used with packets on a G-ACh on
>
>           LSPs, Concatenated Segments of LSPs, and with Sections, and
>
>           MUST NOT be used with PWs. It MUST always be at the bottom of
>
>           the label stack (i.e., S bit set to 1). However, in other MPLS
>
>           environments, this document places no restrictions on where
>
>           the GAL may appear within the label stack or its use with PWs.
>
>
>
>       is replaced by:
>
>
>
>           In MPLS-TP, the GAL MUST be used with packets on a G-ACh on
>
>           LSPs, Concatenated Segments of LSPs, and with Sections, and
>
>           MAY be used with PWs. It MUST always be at the bottom of the
>
>           label stack (i.e., S bit set to 1). However, in other MPLS
>
>           environments, this document places no restrictions on where
>
>           the GAL may appear within the label stack.
>
> =====
>
> should be replaced by
>
> =====
>
>  -  Section 4.2. (GAL Applicability and Usage) in [RFC5586], the
>
>       original text:
>
>
>
>           In MPLS-TP, the GAL MUST be used with packets on a G-ACh on
>
>           LSPs, Concatenated Segments of LSPs, and with Sections, and
>
>           MUST NOT be used with PWs. It MUST always be at the bottom of
>
>           the label stack (i.e., S bit set to 1). However, in other MPLS
>
>           environments, this document places no restrictions on where
>
>           the GAL may appear within the label stack or its use with PWs.
>
>
>
>       is replaced by:
>
>
>
>           In MPLS-TP, the GAL MUST be used with packets on a G-ACh on
>
>           LSPs, Concatenated Segments of LSPs, and with Sections, and
>
>           MAY be used with PWs. The presence of a GAL indicates that
>
>           an ACH immediately follows the MPLS label stack.
>
> ======
>
> - Stewart
>
> This e-mail message is intended for the recipient only and contains
> information which is CONFIDENTIAL and which may be proprietary to ECI
> Telecom. If you have received this transmission in error, please inform us
> by e-mail, phone or fax, and then delete the original and all copies
> thereof.
>
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls@xxxxxxxx
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
>
>
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf



[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]