Subject: [ANCP] comments on "draft-ietf-ancp-framework-00.txt"

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 11:00:12 +0530

Hi,
 
    Can somebody throw more light on following?:
 
1. In case Access Node is connected to multiple NAS devices (which is
basically a multi-edge architecture), current
    ANCP framework states that Access Node be partitioned into multiple
logical partition based on DSL ports.
 
    Consider a case, where a subscriber connected to a single DSL Port
is subscribed to Internet, VoIP and Video
    services. In a multi-edge architecture (where Access Node in this
case is connected to 3 different NAS devices,
    one for VoIP, one for Video and one for Internet), are we expecting
that the Access Node in this case will establish 
    ANCP session with all 3 NAS devices, for one DSL port?
 
2. I beleve we can reuse In-band management IP address of Access Node
(if its supported) for ANCP session
    between Access Node and NAS (over TCP/UDP)? This should be ok, since
the draft proposes to have separate
    VLAN for this session between Access Node and NAS, we should be able
to segregate the traffic based on the
    VLAN. Any comments?
 
3. As more and more pizza-box type Access Nodes are getting deployed at
remote locations (for better reach to
    the subscribers), is maintaining one session for each access node is
scalable in NAS? (specifically for low-port
    density Access Nodes). Probably when Authors present a ANCP use case
on subtending access node to NAS will 
    throw more light on understanding complexities in this case.
 
Regards,
Sathiya

_______________________________________________
ANCP mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ancp

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 18:13:55 +0100

Hi Sathiya,

see my answers inline.

Regards,
Sven

>     ANCP session with all 3 NAS devices, for one DSL port?

Currently the framework assumes that one access port is associated with
one access node partition, and that this partition is associated with
one BNG, covering all services. The framework currently does not address
partitioning per service.

Note that aside from this, the framework does allow for redundant BNGs.

Also note that there has been some discussion (in the DSL Forum) on 
allowing functional partitioning by means of some sort of "ANCP proxy" 
mechanism between the Access Node and the BNG.

>     VLAN for this session between Access Node and NAS, we should be 
> able to segregate the traffic based on the
>     VLAN. Any comments?
>  
It may indeed be possible to reuse this IP address, or you could 
separate IP address. I don't think that the framework should specify
which approach to take. It is also possible that different VLANs are 
used for network management and for ANCP interactions, and that 
different IP addresses are required for each of them (e.g. because these 
functions are handled by different entities).

BTW we plan to provide some more details on this in an updated version 
(stay tuned).

>     throw more light on understanding complexities in this case.

Good point. The number of access nodes can get pretty high. In that
sense, we plan to include in an update the exact scalability
requirements of the protocol.

Also note that the notion of "ANCP proxy" was brought up in this context.

Regards,
Sven

> Regards,
> Sathiya
>   
>  
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>