RE: FW: [PWE3] comments on draft-ietf-pwe3-requirements-03.txt

[Shahram Davari <Shahram_Davari@pmc-sierra.com>]

SPs also need statistics, MIBs, control-plane, signaling,
addressing, etc for the transport-tunnel, why don't we also
add those to the PWE3 requirements?

-Shahram

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas D. Nadeau [mailto:tnadeau@cisco.com]
> Sent: Monday, October 07, 2002 2:14 PM
> To: Shahram Davari
> Cc: neil.2.harrison@bt.com; erosen@cisco.com; pwe3@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: FW: [PWE3] comments on 
> draft-ietf-pwe3-requirements-03.txt 
> 
> 
> 
> >For a PW service, all that is required, is to know that
> >the PW ends up at the correct PE/Interface. If it does not,
> >then another transport-tunnel could be used to deliver
> >the PW to the proper egress.
> >
> >How the SP localizes and repairs the first transport-LSP, 
> which may require
> >transport-LSP traceroute, should be irrelevant to the PW.
> 
>          It may be important that the feature exist on the underlying
> tunnel so that the SPcan trace if they want/need to use it.
> 
>          --Tom
> 
> 
> >-Shahram
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Thomas D. Nadeau [mailto:tnadeau@cisco.com]
> > > Sent: Monday, October 07, 2002 1:49 PM
> > > To: neil.2.harrison@bt.com
> > > Cc: Shahram Davari; erosen@cisco.com; pwe3@ietf.org
> > > Subject: RE: FW: [PWE3] comments on
> > > draft-ietf-pwe3-requirements-03.txt
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >Correct.  I agree with Eric and Shahram on this.  Layer
> > > independence is the
> > > >key....tracing (or indeed any invasive probing) below PW
> > > layer is pertinent
> > > >only to the lower layer.
> > >
> > >          Specification of the actual tracing function on the
> > > underlying tunnel (LSP/TE tunnel/L2TP session)
> > > is independent of the PW, agreed.  The point is that one needs
> > > to exist that can be invoked by what you refer to as the
> > > "client layer", which is why it belongs in the requirements for
> > > PWs.
> > >
> > > >You may not even *own* the lower layers if leasing
> > > >capacity....so you won't even be allowed to trace that.
> > > Further, 'link
> > > >connections at layer N = trail connections at layer N+1'....this
> > > >relationship recurses to the duct.  So where does one stop
> > > saying  'I am
> > > >allowed to trace, etc'?
> > >
> > >          Why don't you think that it is reasonable to assume
> > > that the provider
> > > that owns the core network over which the PWs are run will
> > > also own the
> > > underlying LSPs or L2TP tunnels too?
> > >
> > >          --Tom
> > >
> > >
> > > >regards, Neil
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Shahram Davari [mailto:Shahram_Davari@pmc-sierra.com]
> > > > > Sent: 07 October 2002 16:53
> > > > > To: 'Thomas D. Nadeau'
> > > > > Cc: 'erosen@cisco.com'; neil.2.harrison@bt.com; pwe3@ietf.org
> > > > > Subject: RE: FW: [PWE3] comments on
> > > > > draft-ietf-pwe3-requirements-03.txt
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I disagree. From the PWE3 point of view, it is enough to
> > > know that the
> > > > > packet has arrived at egress PE. The details trace through
> > > > > the network is outside
> > > > > of PWE3 scope as is the tunnel OAM and signaling.
> > > > >
> > > > > -Shahram
> > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: Thomas D. Nadeau [mailto:tnadeau@cisco.com]
> > > > > > Sent: Monday, October 07, 2002 11:49 AM
> > > > > > To: Shahram Davari
> > > > > > Cc: 'erosen@cisco.com'; neil.2.harrison@bt.com; 
> pwe3@ietf.org
> > > > > > Subject: RE: FW: [PWE3] comments on
> > > > > > draft-ietf-pwe3-requirements-03.txt
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > At 08:34 AM 10/7/2002 -0700, Shahram Davari wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Any  tunnel-specific  OAM would  not  be  under  the
> > > > > > > > jurisdiction  of  PWE3,
> > > > > > > > certainly.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >And therefore no requirement for the tunnel tracing should
> > > > > > be in PWE3.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >          I disagree. From the context of PWE3 it is a
> > > > > > requirement to be able to trace the transport
> > > > > > tunnel path(s).
> > > > > >
> > > > > >          --Tom
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The ease or difficulty of  spoofing depends on 
> the tunneling
> > > > > > > > technology, not
> > > > > > > > on the type of the payload carried within the tunnel.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >I am sorry to say that it depends on both the tunnel
> > > > > > technology and the
> > > > > > >payload.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >  -Shahram
> > > > > > >_______________________________________________
> > > > > > >pwe3 mailing list
> > > > > > >pwe3@ietf.org
> > > > > > >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > ----------
> > > > > > Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > > ----------
> > > Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.
> > >
> >_______________________________________________
> >pwe3 mailing list
> >pwe3@ietf.org
> >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3
> 
> 
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time. 
> 
_______________________________________________
pwe3 mailing list
pwe3@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3