The MPLS WG Archive[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index] MPLS Tunnel Maximum Hops
>I am unclear why this object should be writeable. I agree. >As you imply, it is either something that you wish to control >for each individual CSPF >calculation (in which case it is a per tunnel instance >configuration parameter) or it is a >quality of the entire LSR and is applied to all LSPs. > >The current object was intended to reflect the capabilities of >the LSR, not an operational >requirement. Thus it cannot be changed by the operator. > >It would be a different thing if you want to change the LSR's >CSPF behavior (compared with >stating the LSR's capabilities). > >So *if* this was to advance I would say that it should either be: >- a per tunnel instance object >- a configuration parameter for CSPF. >Personally, I do not see the requirement for the former, and >the latter is clearly out of >scope of the MPLS MIB modules. > >Note that there is an edge condition where you need to limit >the size of ERO on some >interfaces but not on others. In my view, this is a property >of the interface which should >be reported to CSPF direct, and not configured through the MPLS MIBs. I agree. The only possible option would be to add another object to reflect the configured value. --Tom > >Cheers, >Adrian > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Nurit Sprecher" <nurit.sprecher@SeabridgeNetworks.com> >To: <jcucchiara@mindspring.com>; "Nurit Sprecher" ><nurit.sprecher@SeabridgeNetworks.com>; ><tnadeau@cisco.com>; <cheenu@bloomberg.net>; ><arunv@force10networks.com> >Cc: <mpls@UU.NET>; <ccamp@ops.ietf.org> >Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2003 7:52 PM >Subject: RE: MPLS Tunnel Maximum Hops > > >> Hi Joan, >> Thanks for the response. >> 1. What is the procedure to push it to the standard right >now when the draft >> is in a last call? >> 2. Do you agree that this should be configurable? Otherwise >how can you >> determine on the value? >> 3. Do you agree that it may be required also to configure it >per tunnel (but >> have a default value)? >> Until now I have just got e-mails on the procedure but not >on the idea >> itself. >> I'll appreciate your response, Nurit. >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: jcucchiara@mindspring.com [mailto:jcucchiara@mindspring.com] >> Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2003 19:32 >> To: Nurit Sprecher; 'tnadeau@cisco.com'; Nurit Sprecher; >> cheenu@bloomberg.net; arunv@force10networks.com >> Cc: mpls@UU.NET; ccamp@ops.ietf.org >> Subject: RE: MPLS Tunnel Maximum Hops >> >> >> Hi Nurit, >> >> I can understand you wanting this change, but that is why >> we had working group last calls in June and an IETF last >> call in Aug/Sep. That is the opportunity for >> folks to give their comments, knowing that the MIB can only >> have minor edits after that. >> >> The most minimal way I see to make this change (and this is >> just my opinion) is: >> >> * change the mplsTunnelMaxHops object to read-write >> * agree upon a DEFVAL (default value upon startup, which can >> be set to a different value by an operator) >> * add to the conformance statement that this may be supported >> as a read-only >> >> So, in addition to making the object read-write, think it needs a >> DEFVAL, and this would need to be discussed and agreed upon by >> the working group. This is more than minor editing in my opinion. >> I am in agreement with Loa and Tom and would like to see >> the MIBs move forward. >> >> -Thanks, >> -Joan >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Nurit Sprecher <nurit.sprecher@SeabridgeNetworks.com> >> Sent: Nov 12, 2003 11:25 AM >> To: "'tnadeau@cisco.com'" <tnadeau@cisco.com>, >> Nurit Sprecher <nurit.sprecher@SeabridgeNetworks.com>, >> cheenu@bloomberg.net, arunv@force10networks.com >> Cc: mpls@UU.NET, ccamp@ops.ietf.org >> Subject: RE: MPLS Tunnel Maximum Hops >> >> Thanks Tom for responding me. >> I understand that this is in a last call state, but this >issue should be >> addressed somehow? >> I am surprised that such an attribute that is provided to >the CSPF algorithm >> is not configurable. How can you determine its value? >Hard-coded? Doesn't it >> have to do with network topology? >> I think it should be configurable and we should see how we >could add it to >> the draft. >> Nurit. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Thomas D. Nadeau [mailto:tnadeau@cisco.com] >> Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2003 18:14 >> To: 'Nurit Sprecher'; cheenu@bloomberg.net; arunv@force10networks.com >> Cc: mpls@uu.net; ccamp@ops.ietf.org >> Subject: RE: MPLS Tunnel Maximum Hops >> >> >> >Any response to the bellow? >> >> The MIB is well past IETF last call, so >> I don't believe we can make any further changes >> at this time. >> >> --Tom >> >> >> >> >Hi, >> >I have a question regarding the mplsTunnelMaxHops scalar that >> >indicates the >> >maximum number of hops that can be specified on each tunnel >> >supported by the >> >LSR. >> >This scalar is a read only attribute but I can find it very >> >useful to let >> >configure it as well. >> >One of the CSPF constraints is the maximum number of hops the >> >LSP may follow >> >through. The limitation on the maximum number for example can >> >result from >> >the maximum packet size when fragmentation is not supported. >> >In such a case >> >the maximum number of hops can depend on the network nature >> >(numbered/unnumbered). Instead of hard coding it with the >> >worst case number, >> >let the network administrator, that is aware of the network nature, >> >configure it. >> >Moreover, I think that the maximum hops should be configurable >> >per tunnel. >> >Thanks, Nurit. >> > >> > >> >> > >
|
|