Re: [ANCP] ANCP Multicast Admission Control

["Maglione Roberta" <roberta.maglione at telecomitalia.it>]

Hi Sven, Francois and All,
    sorry for my late reply.
As Tina and I wrote in the first email current ANCP framework draft in second bullet of 
section 3.4.2 already mentions the scenario where a Policy Server queries the AN directly 
or indirectly. As Tina said in some cases it could be more convenient for the PS to go 
through the NAS instead of querying the AN directly in order to reduce scalability issues 
because the NAS could be seen as an aggregation point for multiple Access nodes.  

As far as the impacts on ANCP I agree that in order to support the indirect scenario, 
PS->NAS->AN, with the interaction NAS->AN handled via ANCP some extensions are required to 
the ANCP protocol. I understand the concerns raised on mailing list about adding new 
requirement not fully agreed by the WG at this stage, in particular given the time 
constrains for the current ANCP protocol completion according to the scheduled milestones.
 
If the working group does not reach the consensus on this point IMHO 
one possibility could be to have an high level description of the depicted 
scenario in order to keep track of this use case and then to postpone the design 
of the protocol details required to fulfill this scenario in next phase of ANCP protocol.  
The intention is to make sure that the current protocol design does not prevent adding 
the additional scenario in next phase. 

What do you think?
Thanks and best regards,

Roberta 


-----Original Message-----
From: Francois Le Faucheur IMAP [mailto:flefauch at cisco.com]
Sent: Mon 2/4/2008 6:11 PM
To: Tina TSOU
Cc: Francois Le Faucheur IMAP; Maglione Roberta; OOGHE Sven; ancp at ietf.org
Subject: Re: [ANCP] ANCP Multicast Admission Control
 
Hi Tina,

On 3 Feb 2008, at 11:59, Tina TSOU wrote:
>
>
> >> how is user info made available to AN?
> [Tina: In AN or PS, manually configure multicast and unicast user  
> bandwidth.]
>
> >> What impact does all this have on ANCP?
> [Tina: No impact. It expand the ANCP scenario, ANCP can support
>  unicast/multicast CAC.]

If this has no impact on ANCP, then the current text should be just  
fine. The current text:
	* (i) describes that there is another model for CAC ie PS-->AN or  
PS-->NAS-->AN,
	* (ii) clarifies that it does not require ANCP extensions (and thus  
is outside scope for ANCP).
Your description above seems to be in line with the text as it is  
today (which is fine by me too).

I think some have different ideas about how ANCP could play a role in  
the PS-->AN and PS-->NAS-->AN and therefore involve some specific  
ANCP extensions.
I recommend we do not try rush those in the first deliverables of  
ANCP WG. Once these additional models are understood and agreed, they  
can be added to the next version of ANCP deliverables.

Cheers

Francois








--------------------------------------------------------------------

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE

This message and its attachments are addressed solely to the persons above and may contain confidential information. If you have received the message in error, be informed that any use of the content hereof is prohibited. Please return it immediately to the sender and delete the message. Should you have any questions, please contact us by replying to webmaster at telecomitalia.it.

        Thank you

                                        www.telecomitalia.it

--------------------------------------------------------------------
                        
_______________________________________________
ANCP mailing list
ANCP at ietf.org
http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ancp