RE: draft-morin-l3vpn-mvpn-considerations

["NAPIERALA, MARIA H, ATTLABS" <mnapierala at att.com>]

The draft is a very good start but there are still some outstanding
mandatory design aspects that need to be addressed: 
- support of non-static RP solutions like BSR. There are current large
MVPNs in SP network that use BSR
- support of "PIM-like" Anycast-RP by allowing multiple RP's to send
traffic in parallel 
- the recommended approach for a source PE to decide when to start
transmitting customer multicast traffic on a S-PMSI (namely, the source
PE waits for a pre-configured period of time) is not satisfactory in my
opinion. A different approach is proposed in
draft-mnapierala-mvpn-rev-03
- what is still missing in this draft as well as in RFC4834 is the
requirement to support PIM Bidir on CE-PE links. This requirement is
coming, e.g., from large financial firms for which using PIM-SM for
certain business critical applications does not scale. Not to mention
the SP :-))

Also, I would suggest that "co-located RP" recommendation is removed
from the document. Co-locating C-RP on PE should not be positioned as a
mandatory mechanism in MVPN, which this draft is addressing.

Sorry for late comments. I might have comments but wanted to send those
COB today. 

Maria 

-) ---------- Forwarded message ----------
-) Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:11:28 -0500
-) From: Ron Bonica <rbonica at juniper.net>
-) To: l3vpn at ietf.org
-) Subject: draft-morin-l3vpn-mvpn-considerations
-) 
-) Folks,
-) 
-) Unless I hear an objection before COB Friday, this document will
become
-) a WG draft.
-) 
-)                                       Ron
-)