eduard:
o) time - depending on need's importance vs urgency, if dynamic PTI
tables population is to be there in a couple of month, or in a couple of
years (would like to point out that understimating the time it may take
to convince l1/trans networks to make use of BGP may be impacting)
I think I understand the timing issue, but what is the specific
'problem' with BGP in relation to L1 transport network?
(with BGP being used for the purpose of discovery)
afaik, there is no large "install base" as for IP/MPLS (L3VPN)
Okay, but debatable. there is probably no large base of anything in this
area.
at least creating a small install base took some time ;-)
picking your words if there is no large control plane deployment in the
L1 networks can we assume that L1VPN would become a real driver for such
large scale deployment ? and by when ?
o) cost - can be seen both ways is there a need to have a single
protocol for LxVPN (x = 1, 2, 3) or is there a need to have a single
protocol for L1/TE operations ? so it depends whether operators are
looking for integrating their TE operations (including VPN
or not) or VPN operations (including TE or not);
Possibly both .. the same/similar protocols for VPN (L1,2,3..) and for
TE (L1,2,3..). I'm not the same protocols for VPN and TE is that obvious,
the applications are very different.
because there is a need to have some characterization of the CE-PE links
(in part. if dual homing like discussed during last L1VPN is going to be
part of the ref.architecture)
o) perf - concerning the protocol perf. we're discussing path vector vs
link-state protocol so impact/properties are different by nature but TE
processing overhead/impact would be worth investigated (note that this
depends on the problem statement e.g. what would be the impact of
progressively incorporating TE specific mechanisms for L1(VPN) into BGP
if such need is identifed ?)
How is L1VPN discovery related to TE (path computation?) these seem not
related to me.
this has been discussed during ietf63 also, having CPI-PPI information
delivers a set of reachable end-points only but the CE-PE links have TE
attributes like any other links that are to be taken into account by the
ingress PE for correctly route the request and reach (one out of the
possible) egress PE
I understand, is the idea to combine both in the auto-discovery
mechanism?
yes -
cheers,
Eduard
.
_______________________________________________
L1vpn mailing list
L1vpn@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l1vpn
