Re: AW: [ANCP] Layer 2 Parameters in the Protocol document

[Michel.Platnic at ecitele.com]

Hi Thomas and All,

Layer 2 parameters transmitted within
the Access-Loop-Circuit-ID are indeed a MUST for several use cases,
so, as explained in your email, this
layer 2 information should not be removed.

The Access-Loop-Circuit-ID is defined
within 'draft-wadhwa-gsmp-l2control-configuration-01.txt' as follows:
 “Access-Node-Identifier atm slot/port:vpi.vci”
  (when ATM/DSL is used)

 “Access-Node-Identifier eth slot/port[:vlan-id]” (when Ethernet/DSL is used)

This means that for ATM interfaces at UI, vpi.vci MUST always be transmitted.


This brings us to at least 3 scenarios for the topology discovery use case (when ATM/DSL is used):
1- no layer 2 information needed, only layer 1 information required to be transmitted
2- single VC and layer 2 encapsulation required to be transmitted
3- multi-VC and layer 2 encapsulation required to be transmitted

Comments:
Scenario1: vci.vpi is actually not required to be transmitted within Access-Loop-Circuit-ID
Scenario2: vci.vpi needed
Scenario3: if encapsulation is needed for each (n) vci.vpi, it means that n topology discovery messages must be transmitted.



Proposal:
If we replace  “Access-Node-Identifier atm slot/port:vpi.vci”   (when ATM/DSL is used)
by  “Access-Node-Identifier atm slot/port:[vpi.vci]”   (when ATM/DSL is used)
then vpi.vci becomes optional and we are fine with case 1.

Question:
Are we fine with the fact that in case of multiple VC (multiple VLAN as well) we must transmit multiple messages?


Regards,
Michel.

"Haag, T" <Thomas.Haag at t-systems.com>

26/09/2006 23:38

To	<Menachem.Dodge at ecitele.com>
cc	ancp at ietf.org
Subject	AW: [ANCP] Layer 2 Parameters in the Protocol document

Menachem,
 
The usage of a VPI/VCI is really
dependent on the use case you are considering.
Regarding the use case access
line topology it is optional because there is no strong relation to a layer
2 parameter if we report the net data rate. 
 
But considering the use cases
OAM (F5 LB for ADSL2/2plus) or line configuration the layer 2 parameter
such as VPI/VCI or VLAN is essential. So I would recommend keeping these
layer 2 parameters in the format of the “Access-Loop-Circuit-ID”.
 
Regards
 
Thomas

---

Von: Menachem.Dodge at ecitele.com [mailto:Menachem.Dodge at ecitele.com]
Gesendet: Montag, 28. August 2006 15:57
An: ancp at ietf.org; swadhwa at juniper.net; jmoisand at juniper.net; ssubramanian at juniper.net;
Haag, Thomas; norbert.voigt at siemens.com
Betreff: [ANCP] Layer 2 Parameters in the Protocol document
 

Hi, 

        I have a question regarding the "Access-Loop-Circuit-ID"
as defined in the document "draft-wadhwa-gsmp-l2control-configuration-01.txt".

        In the case of an Ethernet based local loop
the format is defined as: 

        "Access-Node-Identifier eth slot/port[:vlan-id]"
meaning that the vlan-id is optional.

        In the case of an ATM based local loop the
format is defined as: 

        "Access-Node-Identifier atm slot/port:vpi.vci"
 meaning that the vpi.vci is mandatory.

        I would like this changed to "Access-Node-Identifier
atm slot/port[:vpi.vci]" meaning that the vpi.vci is optional.

        This would allow for multiple vpi/vci(s) on
the same port as a message could be sent  without the vpi.vci field.


===========================================================================

I have a similar question regarding the "Access-Aggregation-Circuit-ID-ASCII"
as defined in the document "draft-wadhwa-gsmp-l2control-configuration-01.txt".

        In the case of an Ethernet based local loop
the format is defined as: 

        "Access-Node-Identifier eth slot/port[:inner-vlan-id][:outer-vlan-id]"
meaning that the vlan-ids are optional.

        In the case of an ATM based local loop the
format is defined as: 

        "Access-Node-Identifier atm slot/port:vpi.vci"
 meaning that the vpi.vci is mandatory.

        I would like this changed to "Access-Node-Identifier
atm slot/port[:vpi.vci]" meaning that the vpi.vci is optional.

        
Thank you kindly. 

Best Regards, 
Menachem _______________________________________________
ANCP mailing list
ANCP at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ancp

_______________________________________________
ANCP mailing list
ANCP at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ancp