Re: draft-morin-l3vpn-mvpn-considerations

[Yakov Rekhter <yakov at juniper.net>]

Maria,

> Ron,
> I would like that those issues are addressed before this draft is
> adopted as a WG document since addressing those issues might impact
> other recommendations stated in the draft.

The issues you brought up below are outside the scope of
draft-morin-l3vpn-mvpn-considerations, and therefore should not be
covered/addressed by draft-morin-l3vpn-mvpn-considerations.

See in-line for more...

> Maria
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: NAPIERALA, MARIA H, ATTLABS 
> Sent: Friday, December 14, 2007 4:48 PM
> To: 'Ron Bonica'; 'l3vpn at ietf.org'
> Subject: RE: draft-morin-l3vpn-mvpn-considerations
> 
> 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

Please keep in mind that draft-morin-l3vpn-mvpn-considerations is
about examining different proposed alternative mechanisms *as
documented in L3VPN WG documents*, not about specifying missing
pieces in these document.

I certainly agree that support for BSR has to be documented in one
of the L3VPN WG documents  (either draft-ietf-l3vpn-2547bis-mcast
or draft-ietf-l3vpn-2547bis-mcast-bgp).

> - support of "PIM-like" Anycast-RP by allowing multiple RP's to send
> traffic in parallel 

See my previous comment.

> - 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

See my previous comment.

> - 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 :-))

See my previous comment. Also, draft-morin-l3vpn-mvpn-considerations
is based on the requirements as specified in rfc4834.

If you want to change rfc4834, then this has to be discussed on its own,
and should not impact progress of draft-morin-l3vpn-mvpn-considerations.

Yakov.