Subject: Clarification on PE native/PW signaling behavior

From: Chris Metz <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2002 20:14:23 -0400

Hi-
Section 7.1 states the following: ".. Set up or teardown of a PW can be 
triggered by ... signaling (i.e., set-up or teardown) of a PWES, e.g., an 
ATM SVC, ..."

So as an example, the establishment of a switched attachment circuit (e.g. 
ATM SVC) terminating in the PE would drive the establishment of a 
corresponding PW across the PSN. Another example is the arrival of a 
switched AC signaling message that would trigger corresponding PW signaling 
across the PSN. Note the latter case MAY result in some form of signaling 
interworking. This would be something that we wish to avoid.

Section 7.5 states then goes on to say: "..it is desirable that the
    PEs participate as little as possible in the signaling and
    maintenance of the native services.  This principle should not,
    however, override the need to satisfactorily emulate the native
    service..."

If the emulated service is a switched VC type (e.g. ATM SVC) between two 
CE's, then some implementations may signal the local AC, remote AC and PW 
in realtime. PE participation in the signaling of the emulated service is 
thus unavoidable. However to avoid any complex signaling interworking 
scenarios, I think it should be possible to opaquely transport native 
signaling elements in PW signaling messages without violating the 
principles of minimum intervention.

Is that a fair statement?

Thanks ...

---

From: Chris Metz <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2002 10:48:53 -0400

Sorry, forget to mention it was the PWE3 architecture document referred to 
below, cheers ...

>switched AC signaling message that would trigger corresponding PW 
>signaling across the PSN. Note the latter case MAY result in some form of 
>signaling interworking. This would be something that we wish to avoid.
>
>_______________________________________________
>pwe3 mailing list
>[email-masked]
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3