RE: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mpls-smp-requirements-06.txt

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

 



Dear Zhenlong,
 
Thanks for the comment.
n:1 is meant to be a special case of m:n, where m protection paths are prepared to protect n working paths,
and may be expressed better if m:1 is used instead.
In my opinion, the next version of this draft needs to incorporate your comments.
 
Best regards,
 
Jeong-dong


 


보낸 사람 : "Zhenlong Cui" <c-sai@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
보낸 날짜 : 2014-06-12 21:40:02 ( +09:00 )
받는 사람 : ietf@xxxxxxxx <ietf@xxxxxxxx>
참조 : mpls@xxxxxxxx <mpls@xxxxxxxx>
제목 : Re: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mpls-smp-requirements-06.txt

Hi authors,

Both 1:n and n:1 are described in your draft.

Could you explain "n:1, 1:n, m:n" where it is first used?
1:n protection and m:n protection are defined in G.808.1 and RFC 4427, but I can't find a definition for n:1.

Best regards,
zhenlong

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mpls [mailto:mpls-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of internet-drafts@xxxxxxxx
> Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2014 4:14 PM
> To: i-d-announce@xxxxxxxx
> Cc: mpls@xxxxxxxx
> Subject: [mpls] I-D Action: draft-ietf-mpls-smp-requirements-06.txt
>
>
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
> This draft is a work item of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working Group of the IETF.
>
> Title : Requirements for MPLS-TP Shared Mesh Protection
> Authors : Yaacov Weingarten
> Sam Aldrin
> Ping Pan
> Jeong-dong Ryoo
> Greg Mirsky
> Filename : draft-ietf-mpls-smp-requirements-06.txt
> Pages : 14
> Date : 2014-06-10
>
> Abstract:
> This document presents the basic network objectives for the behavior
> of shared mesh protection (SMP) which are not based on control plane
> support. This is an expansion of the basic requirements presented in
> RFC 5654 "Requirements for the Transport Profile of MPLS" and RFC
> 6372 "MPLS Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) Survivability Framework".
> This document is to be used as a basis for the definition of any
> mechanism that would be used to implement SMP for MPLS-TP data paths,
> in networks that delegate executive action for resiliency to the data
> plane.
>
>
> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-smp-requirements/
>
> There's also a htmlized version available at:
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mpls-smp-requirements-06
>
> A diff from the previous version is available at:
> http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-mpls-smp-requirements-06
>
>
> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available
> at tools.ietf.org.
>
> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls@xxxxxxxx
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls

_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls

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