Subject: draft-yasukawa-mpls-rsvp-p2mp-00.txt

From: Seisho Yasukawa <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 17:44:49 +0900

Hello everyone,

Please note that the following draft has been newly posted to MPLS WG.

Extended RSVP-TE for Point-to-Multipoint LSP Tunnels
<draft-yasukawa-mpls-rsvp-p2mp-00.txt>

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-yasukawa-mpls-rsvp-p2mp-00.txt

This draft specifies the extension to RSVP-TE signaling protocol
in support of MPLS P2MP LSP creation/deletion and Leaf initiated
Join/Leave signaling.

We think P2MP MPLS technology will become increasingly important
with the dissemination of new, real-time application, such as content
delivery services and video conference, which require P2MP real-time
transmission capability with much more bandwidth and stricter QoS
control mechanism than conventional IP application.

We NTT as a service provider really needs this kind of P2MP MPLS
technology because this technology opens the possibility to offer
our customer a new broadband service.

We think discussion of P2MP technology agrees with the charter of this wg.
And, we found that applications of "multicast explicit routing"are a target
topic for "RSVP-TE "(RFC3209, Section 4.3.1) and "IP Multicast in a MPLS
Environment"(RFC3353, Section.7)

Therefore, we want to discuss this P2MP MPLS technology in this wg.

Please give us any comments from technology, application and operation sides.

We need a lot of discussion and advice for protocol architecture to improve
this architecture.

Thanks

Seisho

------------------------------------------------------------
Please refere followings (contents of this draft).

This draft include the contents of "draft-yasukawa-mpls-rsvp-p2mp-01".
In this new draft, protocol architecture is modified and the protocol name
was changed from "multicast" to "P2MP" to clarify the technology difference.

Section 0 describes why this draft suit to this wg.
Please see sec.0.4 to know the reason why we introduce P2MP tunnel
without IP multicast.

Section 4 describes the architecture of this protocol.
The new concepts; P2MP LSP tunnel and TERO/TRRO are newly introduced.
The TERO is main architecture to realize P2MP TE LSP.

Section 5 - 7 describes the detailed signaling mechanisms.

Section 11 shows the difference between RSVP multicasting and P2MP
TE tunnels.

We describe the difference between multicast LSP realized by
RSVP-TE&IP multicasting and P2MP TE LSP realized by TERO.
---------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Loa Andersson <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 20:08:10 +0100

All,

I've received a couple of questions if this is a working group draft.
Answer is that it is not, a previous draft was presented in Atlanta
and (I think in Yokohama), the name change makes it go back to -00.
In Atlanta we said that "the discusion will contiune on the list".

Possibly the misunderstanding comes from the first line in
the mail:
"Please note that the following draft has been newly posted to MPLS WG."

my understanding here is that this a request from the authors to
have comments on the draft and discusion on the subject matter.

/Loa

-- 
Loa Andersson

Mobile          +46 739 81 21 64
Email           [email-masked]