60 likes | 70 Views
This draft proposes changes to the VCAT and LCAS functionality in GMPLS and discusses potential solutions. It includes contributions from various experts and addresses issues such as interface discovery and advertising capabilities.
E N D
Operating VCAT and LCAS with GMPLS IETF 65 draft-bernstein-ccamp-gmpls-vcat-lcas-02 •Greg Bernstein: gregb@grotto-networking.com •Diego Caviglia: Diego.Caviglia@(marconi.com, ericsson.com) •Richard Rabbat: richard@us.fujitsu.com
Outline • Changes to the draft • Discussion of proposed and other possible solutions
Changes from -01 • Received contributions from several people – Huub van Helvoort (hhelvoort@chello.nl) – Lyndon Ong (Lyong@Ciena.com) – Wataru Imajiku (imajuku.wataru@lab.ntt.co.jp) – Julien Meuric (julien.meuric@francetelecom.com) • Added informational section (3.1) to illustrate the current support for VCAT/LCAS in GMPLS • Moved overview section to appendix A • Added a service provider perspective on VCAT/LCAS as new appendix B
Changes from -01 (continued) • Cleaned the exhaustive list of component signal configuration scenarios • Highlighted discovery of interface capability that would be nice (more on this later) • New section based on positive feedback from IETF 64 to use Association object for diversely routed component signals
Discovery Aspect: feedback sought • Now, privately or on mailing list • Looking for suggestions as to whether we should advertise VCAT and LCAS capability of the interface (in the context of VCAT/LCAS, only needed for ingress/egress) • Motivation is to be able to compute a path that supports the needed termination capability – Example: Some VCAT interfaces do not support LCAS, so if one sets up a VCAT group then wants to increase or decrease the bandwidth, it will fail • Is this something we should do using routing, signaling?
Next Steps • This work was of interest to the WG during IETF 64 • Determined to be within scope of CCAMP • Request to adopt as WG draft