Subject: Another question on draft-ietf-tewg-diff-te-proto-01.txt

From: "David Allan" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2002 12:48:07 -0400

Section 3.3.1 states:
...LSRs MUST support for every LSP, an additional configurable parameter
which indicates the Class Type of the Traffic trunk transported by the
LSP...

This implies a 1:1 relationship between TTs and LSPs, this wouldn't
necessarily be true for an E-LSP. Now the mechanisms don't currently exist
to support associating multiple class types/bandwidth constraints for an
E-LSP, but if traffic trunk is exclusively an L-LSP concept, couldn't we pin
this down a bit more explicitly..?

thanks
Dave

---

From: Nabil Seddigh <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2002 12:29:11 -0400

Dave,

Mechanisms to support multiple class types on an E-LSP were proposed
in this WG. Some providers and vendors expressed interest in 
such schemes. However, in Utah, the WG felt that standardizing
multiple OA-ELSP would be premature until the basic DS-TE
mechanisms are standardized and shown to be viably deployable.

Updated versions of the related drafts can be found below:

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ganti-tewg-diffserv-multicos-elspreq-00.txt
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ganti-mpls-diffserv-elsp-02.txt

Best,
Nabil Seddigh