Subject: [CCAMP] Fw: New Version Notification for draft-zhang-ccamp-gmpls-call-extensions-01

From: Fatai Zhang <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2009 11:02:53 +0800

Hi all,

I just uploaded an updated draft which is draft-zhang-ccamp-gmpls-call-extensions-01.

According to the feedback from IETF 74th meeting, I used the existing ERO and RRO to replace Call-ERO and Call-RRO.

Pls check out the draft for detail.

Any comments are welcome.

Thanks

Fatai
 
Advanced Technology Department
Wireline Networking Business Unit
Huawei Technologies Co., LTD.
Huawei Base, Bantian, Longgang,
Shenzhen 518129 P.R.China
Tel: +86-755-28972912
Fax: +86-755-28972935
----- Original Message ----- 
From: IETF I-D Submission Tool 
To: [email-masked] 
Cc: [email-masked] ; [email-masked] 
Sent: Wednesday, July 08, 2009 10:53 AM
Subject: New Version Notification for draft-zhang-ccamp-gmpls-call-extensions-01

A new version of I-D, draft-zhang-ccamp-gmpls-call-extensions-01.txt has been successfuly submitted by Fatai Zhang and posted to the IETF repository.

Filename: draft-zhang-ccamp-gmpls-call-extensions
Revision: 01
Title: RSVP-TE extensions to GMPLS Calls
Creation_date: 2009-07-08
WG ID: Independent Submission
Number_of_pages: 12

Abstract:
Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Resource 
ReserVation Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) extensions are 
used to support Calls. Although it is stated that these mechanisms 
are applicable to any environment (including multi-area), the "Call 
Path" is determined hop-by-hop by each "Call Manager" in sequence 
along the path of the Call. 

 However, it is desirable to allow the Call-initiator to identify the 
Call Path explicitly in some cases (especially in the multi-domain 
case). 

This document describes RSVP-TE signaling extensions to allow the 
Call-initiator to identify the Call Path explicitly when transit 
nodes (besides the Call-initiator and Call-terminator) are involved 
in these Calls. 

Conventions used in this document 

The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC-2119 [RFC2119].

The IETF Secretariat.