[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PWE3] new draft - Extension to LDP-VPLS for Ethernet broadcast & multicast



Simon,

 

Your draft proposes to create parallel P2MP trees in addition to already existed P2P LSPs just for the Multicast and broadcast traffic. IEEE802.1ak (MMRP) allows many multicast groups to be formed (or changed) automatically. Does it mean that each PE node has to create a new P2MP tree when a new Multicast group is created? It is a lot of processing on each PE. Each PE is to process the 802.ak protocol to create/delete new P2MP trees and add/remove branches.

 

It is a lot of effort for the benefit. I think a better approach is to let each PE be aware of the 802.1ak protocol so that each PE can select the relevant P2P LSPs (subset of entire LSPs) for each Multicast group. Are you interested in pursuing in this direction? If yes, I can put together a draft to outline the basic approach.

 

Linda Dunbar

 


From: l2vpn-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:l2vpn-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf Of Simon Delord
Sent: Monday, March 01, 2010 11:13 PM
To: l2vpn at ietf.org; pwe3
Cc: frederic.jounay at orange-ftgroup.com
Subject: new draft - Extension to LDP-VPLS for Ethernet broadcast & multicast

 

Hi L2VPN & PWE3 workgroups,

There is a new internet draft - Extension to LDP-VPLS for Ethernet broadcast and multicast (

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-delord-l2vpn-ldp-vpls-broadcast-exten-00) .

Our proposed approach relies on a simple extension to LDP-VPLS to optimise Ethernet Multicast/Broadcast traffic within a carrier's network. It allows the use of unidirectional point-to-multipoint PseudoWires to minimise payload frame duplication on physical links.

The authors would like to solicit comments from the workgroups. In particular,

- whether there is a need to optimise Ethernet broadcast/multicast traffic when using VPLS.

- whether carriers with LDP-VPLS (RFC 4762) would like to consider a solution that does not require BGP.

Thanks a lot.

Simon