Subject: [mpls] Draft on Shared Mesh Protection

From: David Allan I <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2011 12:52:29 -0500

I'd like to draw the WGs attention to "A framework for the use of SPMEs for shared mesh protection"

http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-allan-spme-smp-fmwk/

This differs from other proposals in this space in that it focuses on implementing business policy via packet level preemption vs. path level preemption.

We believe there are a lot of operational and implementation complexities that can be avoided with such an approach as it merely becomes a planning exercise combined with existing kit.

The actual behavior is to degrade pre-empted services vs. completely blocking them as the selector is the SPME TC bits, and not a protocol. However the implication is there is no explicit notification to the endpoints of preempted services that the degredation is happening. They would have to infer this from PM or CC failure...

The authors would seek operator feedback on whether explicit notification is a real requirement, noting that this goes hand in hand with "your service has been completely preempted...". We would be similarly interested if there is room for the WG to consider both approaches...

Much thanks
Dave & Greg