Subject: [mpls] Management considerations in draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-multi-topology

From: "Adrian Farrel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2013 12:08:25 +0100

Hi,

> (2) Regarding to the Manageability Considerations, it is indeed as what you
> suggested here that the function being added here is not simple to manage or
> operate, and will have impact on the way that the network is run. We are
> thinking to have a separate document to detail these considerations late.
> Will this be OK?

It is possible that you will get away with a pointer to another document, but I
think this would only work if that document really exists and has content.

The IESG has (by now) got used to the trick of pointing at another document that
is never written :-)

The purpose of pushing for management considerations at this stage is that there
may be elements of the manageability that require rethinking of how the protocol
works.

Frankly, I think that the discussion of the IANA registry is one such example.
How do I, as an operator trying to debug my network, make the association
between the LDP label advertisement, and the IGP routing advertisement if I
don't know the mapping that has been used to convert the IGP MT ID into the LDP
MT ID?

Thus, I think it worth taking the time to at least set out the management
problems. Some may require additional protocol development in BFD or somesuch,
and you don't need to do those developments up front. But you should identify
what work is needed.

Adrian