Subject: Liaison from ITU-T on CCAMP ASON Routing Evaluation I-D

From: "Adrian Farrel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2005 17:06:19 +0100

Hi,

We have received the following liaison from Study Group 15 of the ITU-T.

This is informational so no action is required, but obviously the ASON
Routing Solutions design team will take these items on board in their next
revision.

As with all incoming liaisons, this is posted at
http://www.olddog.co.uk/incoming.htm and will be placed on the IETF's
liaison Web site.

You can find the attachments there as well.

Adrian

=========
Title: Reply to Evaluation of IETF Routing Protocols in the Context of
ASON
From : ITU-T SG15, Q14/15
Contact: Hing-Kam Lam ([email-masked])
For: Information

Thank you for informing Q14/15 of the progress of the design team
operating under the umbrella of the CCAMP working group within the IETF.
As requested, Q14/15 reviewed the document
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ason-routing-eval-00.txt and have provided some
detailed comments directly in the document as marked up text. The marked
up document is attached below.

As further context to comments provided in the document:
-  In "4. Requirements - Overview". It is not required for UNI Transport
resource names
   to be included as reachability information in any routing protocol.
They are
   resolved to SNPP addresses and SNPP addresses are reachable.
-  In "5.1 Terminology and Identification".  Text of SP16 from G.8080 is
attached as it
   is relevant to the RC ID format.
-  Q14 would like to see items that are under evaluation to be resolved
(e.g., cases
   where Li is given a value different from TE Router ID. Our
understanding is that the
   TE Router ID is the address of a point in an IP-layer topology,
possibly an SCN
   address. Such separation is permitted by the ASON routing architecture'
s name space
   separation concepts).
-  In "5.3.1 Link Attributes".  Representation of layer resources and
utilization is
   required.
-  In "6. Evaluation Scenarios".  Add cases where multiple Ri announce on
behalf of an
   Li or multiple Li.
-  We suggest that the lexicography draft be added as informative and that
ASON routing
   requirements draft be added as normative.

Q14/15 appreciates the work undertaken to enable protocols that realize
the ASON routing architecture, as well as the opportunity to review that
work as it progresses.

---

From: dimitri papadimitriou <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2005 10:46:40 +0200

hi adrian

the rsdt will take the below points into account during document's next 
revision

thanks,
- dimitri.

Adrian Farrel wrote:
> .