The MPLS WG Archive

[Jean Philippe Vasseur <jvasseur@cisco.com>]

Hi,

At 10:43 11/12/2002 -0500, Cheng-Yin Lee wrote:
>Dimitri, JP,
>While I think an applicability section/statement is fine, I'm not sure 
>if  a mechanism
>to compute inter-area TE path belong in this  ID.

This was exactly my impression.

JP.

>We did include applications in the first discussion of this ID and in the 
>slides
>http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/02mar/slides/ccamp-6/index.html and in 
>addressing
>Kireeti's suggestion to include a discussion on the impact of message 
>size, we provided
>an inter-area example for illustration purposes. However,  there have also 
>been
>suggestions in the past to not discuss applications specifically  in the 
>draft itself.
>I am fine with either way.
>
>thanks
>cheng-yin
>
>Dimitri.Papadimitriou@alcatel.be wrote:
>
> > jp,
> >
> > > this ID does not propose a mechanism to compute inter-area TE path
> >
> > well i would say that either none of them does it, or all of
> > them, more accurately route exclusions are applicable to any
> > mpls network where full computation of the ero is not performed
> > before the LSP is signaled, implying thus a "scope" for computed
> > path thus among other applicable to multiple areas - nevertheless
> > i agree that a next version of this i-d should probably include
> > an applicability section covering this in a bit more details (see
> > also section 4.1 for an example -
> >
> > this said and as for any other input or i-d provided on constraint-
> > passing (as well as path query, btw) lot of work is still needed to
> > achieve a decent first step in this effort;
> >
> > thanks,
> > - dimitri.
> >
> > Jean Philippe Vasseur wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Dimitri,
> > >
> > > cc'ing CCAMP - see in line,
> > >
> > > At 17:45 10/12/2002 +0100, Dimitri.Papadimitriou@alcatel.be wrote:
> > > >jp,
> > > >
> > > >in fact the below list should simply be as follows for
> > > >signalling-based methods: 1) constraint-passing 2) loose
> > > >routing and 3) path query;
> > > >
> > > >and the for constraint-passing we have a several i-d's
> > > >such as,
> > > >
> > > >http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-lee-ccamp-rsvp-te-exclude-r 
> oute-01.txt
> > > >
> > >
> > > this ID does not propose a mechanism to compute inter-area TE path
> > >
> > > >constraint passing may also be extended using the crank-
> > > >back as listed below; the usage scenarios of these methods
> > > >are described in the following:
> > > >
> > > >http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-kompella-mpls-multiarea-te- 
> 03.txt
> > > >
> > > >now probably it is worth spending some time in considering
> > > >input coming from the tewg wrt to this effort, most of the
> > > >input that you see listed above has been produced over the
> > > >past year (and more) i can't imagine stepping in the protocol
> > > >details without a clear consensus on what do we want to cover
> > > >within the ccamp wg & w/o taking into account the tewg rec's
> > > >(probably better to discuss this on the ccamp mailing list)
> > >
> > > Fully agree with you. Hopefully multi-area TE should be soon part of the
> > > CCAMP charter.
> > >
> > > JP.
> > >
> > > >thanks,
> > > >- dimitri.
> > > >
> > > >Jean Philippe Vasseur wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > At 13:53 10/12/2002 +0530, sachin laddha wrote:
> > > > > >Hi,
> > > > > >'draft-ash-multi-area-te-reqmts-01.txt' stated in section 5 as
> > > > > >"Initial requirements are given here for protocol support of the
> > > > multi-area
> > > > > >TE methods, which include needs to support
> > > > > >
> > > > > >*       path-computation-server (PCS) functionality [kompella, lee,
> > > > vasseur,
> > > > > >te-qos-routing],
> > > > > >*       query functionality [query, vasseur],
> > > > > >*       crankback functionality [crankback],
> > > > > >
> > > > > >and, optionally,
> > > > > >
> > > > > >*       TE feedback functionality [feedback], and
> > > > > >*       summary-LSA functionality [summary_lsa]."
> > > > > >.
> > > > > >I want to know whether cisco/juniper routers (standard ones) 
> supports
> > > > all of
> > > > > >the above extension.
> > > > > >or if not,how many.......or Whether router is supposed to 
> support how many
> > > > > >...
> > > > >
> > > > > I do not think any vendor supports all the method mentioned 
> above, but just
> > > > > a subset. If you are running a network, your feed-backs on your 
> preferred
> > > > > method is very welcome.
> > > > >
> > > > > JP.
> > > > >
> > > > > >Regards,
> > > > > >---Sachin
> > > >
> > > >--
> > > >Papadimitriou Dimitri
> > > >E-mail : dimitri.papadimitriou@alcatel.be
> > > >Private: http://www.rc.bel.alcatel.be/~papadimd/index.html
> > > >E-mail : dpapadimitriou@psg.com
> > > >Public : http://psg.com/~dpapadimitriou/
> > > >Address: Fr. Wellesplein 1, B-2018 Antwerpen, Belgium
> > > >Phone  : Work: +32 3 2408491 - Home: +32 2 3434361
> >
> > --
> > Papadimitriou Dimitri
> > E-mail : dimitri.papadimitriou@alcatel.be
> > Private: http://www.rc.bel.alcatel.be/~papadimd/index.html
> > E-mail : dpapadimitriou@psg.com
> > Public : http://psg.com/~dpapadimitriou/
> > Address: Fr. Wellesplein 1, B-2018 Antwerpen, Belgium
> > Phone  : Work: +32 3 2408491 - Home: +32 2 3434361