Subject: [mpls] R: Re: Mixing ICC and Global-IDs in MPLS-TP Identifiers?

From: "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 3 May 2011 00:21:37 +0200 (CEST)

What type of identifers are you planning to use within your network? ICC or IP 
based identifers or both?

What about an MS-PW where the two T-PEs are located within two domains that 
support different identifier schemes?

>----Messaggio originale----
>Da: [email-masked]
>Data: 2-mag-2011 21.48
>A: "George Swallow"<[email-masked]>
>Cc: <[email-masked]>
>Ogg: Re: [mpls] Mixing ICC and Global-IDs in MPLS-TP Identifiers?
>
>George et al,
>
>Verizon does not have any requirement for mixed use of Global IDs and
>ICCs. We are fine with specifications that require both ends of an LSP
>to use one or the other.
>
>Thanks,
>Andy
>
>On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 5:16 PM, George Swallow <[email-masked]> wrote:
>> All -
>>
>> Many of the comments received from the ITU on
>> draft-ietf-mpls-tp-identifiers-04 have to do with the Global and ICC
>> identifiers.
>>
>> The identifiers for Tunnel, LSP, PW, and MEG include fields to identify 
each
>> end of an LSP.  Currently the draft allows a Tunnel, LSP, PW, or MEG to 
use
>> either the Global-ID for both ends or or the ICC for both ends.  Mixed use
>> is not permitted.
>>
>> The ITU liaison requests that we allow mixed use.
>>
>> The authors of the draft are very reluctant to do this.
>>
>> Obtaining an AS Number (from which the Global-ID is derived) is a fairly
>> trivial procedure.  Many organizations if not most already have AS 
Numbers.
>> Such an addition will add numerous object formats, and test cases.
>> The extent inter-provider MPLS-TP is as yet unknown.  If mixed modes of 
ICC
>> and Global-ID identification is required, they can be added later.
>> For signaled connections, there is no plan to allow routing based on 
either
>> the Global-ID or ICC.  That would be a radical change to how IP works.
>>  However for IP routing to work (in order to forward the signaling
>> messages), the providers involved will need to run BGP and have AS 
numbers.
>>
>> We are looking for input/consensus from the WG.
>>
>> George, Eric, & Matthew
>> _______________________________________________
>> mpls mailing list
>> [email-masked]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
>>
>>
>_______________________________________________
>mpls mailing list
>[email-masked]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
>