Subject: RE: draft-raggarwa-rsvpte-pw-01.txt

From: "Nurit Sprecher" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 15:20:32 +0200

Hi Chris,
When signaling a TE MS PW, the S-PEs (as are defined in the requirement
draft) should be aware of the requirements for resiliency for the TE PWs
in order to select an appropriate tunnel for the PW. For example, if we
have a requirement for a service that it should nut be disturbed for
more than 50 ms in case of a failure, the S-PE should know it in order
to select a TE Tunnel that is FRR protected. The FRR recovery would be
of the TE Tunnel ofcourse, but the S-PE should know this information for
the tunnel selection sake (otherwise it should be manually configured
with information). And so on.
I would agree with you regarding a single hope PW. But for MS PWs, where
the S-PE should stitch/switch/whatever the PWs from one Tunnel to
another, it should be aware of the requirements for the TE PWs. Either
this information is manually configured at each S-PE for each PW or the
information is signaled via the control plane. I think that this is one
of the purposes of the control plane.
Please note that we have a good idea on the requirements for TE MS PWs
as they are already stated in the WG's requirement draft. 
Best regards,
Nruit.

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
Chris Liljenstolpe
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2005 8:19 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [PWE3] draft-raggarwa-rsvpte-pw-01.txt

At this time, I do not support making this draft a working group item.  
I have yet to see a substantial set of formal requirements and a case 
that the existing methods do not meet those requirements.

Much talk has been raised, such as re-route of PW's, that I think, in 
reality, are not relevant. When this work was started, it was commonly 
understood that the underlying network would handle traffic 
engineering, fault restoration, and the like.  Speaking as a past 
operator, I would much prefer having 10's or 100's of traffic 
engineering tunnels rerouting in the event of a network event, than 
1000's or 10000's of service or PW tunnels doing the same thing,  Let's 
leave the separation where it makes sense.  The things that RSVP-TE 
excels in belongs in the underlying "transport" of the service, not the 
service itself.

	Chris

_______________________________________________
pwe3 mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3