Hi David,
Thanks for the reminder.
I have few general notes on the document.
* I would NOT limit the Client interface (Dd) to Ethernet or OTN. Also
Data center interfaces should be supported (like Fiber Channel).
* In WT-319 Part-B is mentioned the fully separated solution while in
TR-319 the fully integrated DWDM interface in the client equipment.
* The two solutions can signal on the UNI interface different service
request (Ethernet or OTN in the former, optical channel in the latter)
* I'd like to see also the Hybrid solution to be supported (i.e. Fully
integrated on one side of the circuit and fully separated on the other side).
* Although are not yet RFC there are some draft proposal to manage the
Protection and the diverse path.
* Support of LSP SRLG collection in the core and sharing the list to the
Edge (SRLG RRO)
* XRO to exclude critical elements on the network when signalling LSP
(at node link and SRLG level) carrying protecting traffic.
* Diverse path signalling based on LSP-id
* I'd discourage the use of SNMP for the network provisioning and
deployment.
Best Regards,
Gabriele
[http://www.cisco.com/swa/i/logo.gif]
Gabriele Galimberti
Principal Engineer
Cisco Photonics Srl
via S.Maria Molgora, 48 C
20871 - Vimercate (MB)
Italy
www.cisco.com/global/IT/<http://www.cisco.com/global/IT/>
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Phone :+39 039 2091462
Mobile :+39 335 7481947
Fax :+39 039 2092049
From: CCAMP <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf
of David Sinicrope
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: Monday, January 25, 2016 5:53 PM
To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>"
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>"
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>"
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Cc: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>"
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>,
"[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>"
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>,
"[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>"
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: [CCAMP] Response to Broadband Forum Liaison - Achieving Packet Network
Optimization using DWDM Interfaces 18-Dec-2016
Hi All,
Just a reminder to the CCAMP, PCE and TEAS WGs that we still have
https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/1449/ requesting a response.
Please finalize and send your comments to the respective WG Chairs if you
haven't already. We will coordinate a joint WG response.
Thanks,
Dave
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
