Subject: [mpls-tp] Ring Protection in MPLS-TP

From: "Diego Caviglia" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 17:08:58 +0200

H i all, 
         at last IETF the following ID about ring protection has been
presented, the ID is focused on p2mp but the proposed mechanism can be
applied to p2p LSP.

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ceccarelli-mpls-tp-p2mp-ring-00
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ceccarelli-mpls-tp-p2mp-ring-00>  

http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/74/slides/mpls-20/mpls-20.htm
<http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/74/slides/mpls-20/mpls-20.htm>  

The ID was also trying to compare different solutions e.g. steering vs
the new proposed one (section 6) 

We, as authors, have not received any comments so far. 

Now there are two more IDs on ring protection. 

I'm wondering, and I'd like to ask this to chairs and community, if it
is the case to try to converge this kind of work in a single document
addressing all the possible requirement for ring.

BR 

Diego

---

From: "BUSI ITALO" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 18:41:36 +0200

Diego,
 
it sounds a reasonable approach.
 
In addition, I think that also the technical solution in ITU-T draft
G.8132 should be taken into account during this work and at least the
two co-editors of this draft being directly involved.
 
As all the authors of these drafts happen to work for companies that are
ITU-T members so they can easily to the latest version of this draft.
However, if it is more convenient for any of you, I can send it via
e-mail to you (just let me know).
 
Italo

________________________________

	From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
On Behalf Of Diego Caviglia
	Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2009 5:09 PM
	To: [email-masked]
	Subject: [mpls-tp] Ring Protection in MPLS-TP

	 H i all, 
	         at last IETF the following ID about ring protection has
been presented, the ID is focused on p2mp but the proposed mechanism can
be applied to p2p LSP.

	The ID was also trying to compare different solutions e.g.
steering vs the new proposed one (section 6) 

	I'm wondering, and I'd like to ask this to chairs and community,
if it is the case to try to converge this kind of work in a single
document addressing all the possible requirement for ring.

	BR 

	Diego