Subject: [mpls-tp] Question RE: draft-abfb-mpls-tp-control-plane-framework

From: Greg Mirsky <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2010 13:06:46 -0800

Dear Editors, Authors and All,
I've a question about portraying PW sublayer and LDP control plane in
Figures 1 and 2 of the document. Though Section 5 differentiates SS-PW from
MS-PW, mentions differences between S-PE and T-PE, the graphical depictions
of the MPLS-TP Control Plane portray PW and LDP sublayers as single segment,
end-to-end entities. If MS-PW is not outside of the scope of the document,
as I couldn't find that being stated in the text, would it be proper that
the MPLS-TP Control Plane Reference Model reflect the fact that MS-PW being
switched at S-PEs (even if PW Label remains the same)?

Regards,
Greg

---

From: Lou Berger <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2010 11:42:40 -0500

Greg,
	MS-PW and SS-PW are in scope for both TP and TP's control plane.  The
control plane framework document does mention MS-PW a few times, and I
don't expect any change of this.

MS-PWs aren't shown in Figures 1 and 2 for simplicity.  We can at least
change the text of Section 1 to make this explicit.  We'll also take a
look at the figure to see if we can add MS-PWs and still have a sensical
figure.

Thank you for the comment.

Lou

On 3/6/2010 4:06 PM, Greg Mirsky wrote:
> Figures 1 and 2 of the document. Though Section 5 differentiates SS-PW
> from MS-PW, mentions differences between S-PE and T-PE, the graphical
> depictions of the MPLS-TP Control Plane portray PW and LDP sublayers as
> single segment, end-to-end entities. If MS-PW is not outside of the
> scope of the document, as I couldn't find that being stated in the text,
> would it be proper that the MPLS-TP Control Plane Reference Model
> reflect the fact that MS-PW being switched at S-PEs (even if PW Label
> remains the same)?
> 
> Regards,
> Greg