The MPLS WG Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS WG Archive>month:2003-Aug> msg00038



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

TE Link MIB Changes

  • From: m.dubuc@rogers.com
  • Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 20:45:13 -0400
  • X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at fep03-mail.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com from [127.0.0.1] using ID <m.dubuc@rogers.com> at Wed, 13 Aug 2003 20:45:13 -0400

I have received mails from an implementor which led me to review more carefully the content of the TE link MIB descriptor tables and the latest drafts (especially draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-gmpls-extensions-09.txt and draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-hierarchy-08.txt). I have concluded that there are deficiencies with some of the TE link tables with regards to support of the Interface Switching Capability descriptors and the support of Forwarding Adjacency.

I would like to revisit the TE link MIB and would like to know if there are objections in:
- The way the current tables are structured, there can be several interface switching capability descriptor per TE link, but they must all share the same switching capability (only the encoding type can be changed). I propose to remove the teLinkMuxCapability from the teLinkTable and push it down to the teLinkDescriptorTable.
- I propose to add rows for maximum LSP bandwidth at priority 0..7 to the teLinkDescriptorTable.
- I propose to add the minimum LSP bandwidth, interface MTU and indication rows to the teLinkDescriptor table. Would add some conformance statement to have support for these fields only for PSC/FA (minimum LSP bandwidth and interface MTU) or SONET/SDH (minimum LSP bandwdith and indication).
- Remove maximum LSP bandwidth per priority in teLinkBandwidth table.
- I propose to remove the componentLinkMuxCapability from the componentLinkTable and push it down to the componentLinkDescriptorTable.
- I propose to add rows for maximum LSP bandwidth at priority 0..7 to the componentLinkDescriptorTable.
- I propose to add the minimum LSP bandwidth, interface MTU and indication rows to the componentLinkDescriptor table. Would add some conformance statement to have support for these fields only for PSC/FA (minimum LSP bandwidth and interface MTU) or SONET/SDH (minimum LSP bandwdith and indication).
- Remove maximum LSP bandwidth per priority in componentLinkBandwidth table.
- Add a field in the teLinkTable to assess whether TE link is a FA or not (link to FA-LSP?).

If the above is reasonable, I will go ahead with changes.

Martin


1