The MPLS WG Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS WG Archive>month:2000-Aug> msg00214



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]  
  [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index]

consensus to make draft-kompella-mpls-te-mib-00.txt a TEWG item?

  • From: Arun Viswanathan <arun@force10networks.com>
  • Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 18:38:20 -0700
  • Cc: mpls@UU.NET


Kireeti,

> 
> Action item: replace all occurences of "mplsLsp..." in the "Kireeti"
> TE MIB with "trafficTrunk...".
> 
> 

Good try :-)

Your MIB is also a tunnel MIB. There is no difference between a tunnel
defined in MPLS-TE-MIB or your MIB wrt a traffic-trunk defined in PASTE
or rfc2702. A tunnel is a entity routable based on some constrains. 
However there is difference, in addition to a tunnel, a traffic-trunk
also represents the associated FECs (or a set of traffic flows belonging
to a class). In other words, a traffic-trunk is tunnel and FECs considered
together.

Howsoever you may choose to slice or dice it, I think the two MIBs
are largely the same, where your MIB has some operationally interesting
objects not contained in the MPLS-TE-MIB. I think this is the main
reason for this debate.

-arun