Lucy,
That's a possibility, but not really necesssary. It
might simply be the case that a network operator wants it
to work this way...
--
Eric
--> -----Original Message-----
--> From: Lucy Yong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--> Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 2:50 PM
--> To: 'Gray, Eric'; 'Adrian Farrel'
--> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--> Subject: RE: [Pce] RE: Comments about draft-ietf-pce-architecture-05
-->
--> Eric,
-->
--> Yeah, maybe state explicitly head-end that is not a PCC in
--> this scenario.
-->
--> Thanks,
--> Lucy
-->
--> -----Original Message-----
--> From: Gray, Eric [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--> Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 1:34 PM
--> To: Lucy Yong; 'Adrian Farrel'
--> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--> Subject: RE: [Pce] RE: Comments about draft-ietf-pce-architecture-05
-->
--> Lucy,
-->
--> Figure 5 is specifically trying to show a different
--> flow.
-->
--> In earlier figures, the source of a service request
--> is not shown. In general, however, one likely source for
--> a service request is an NMS.
-->
--> I think the difference we may be trying to show in
--> figure 5 is that an NMS may act as a PCC on behalf of a
--> head-end that may not be a PCC itself.
-->
--> --
--> Eric
-->
--> --> -----Original Message-----
--> --> From: Lucy Yong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--> --> Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 11:37 AM
--> --> To: 'Adrian Farrel'
--> --> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--> --> Subject: [Pce] RE: Comments about draft-ietf-pce-architecture-05
--> -->
--> --> Adrian,
--> -->
--> --> Let's put down the time-based reservation for now. I have
--> --> another comment
--> --> about the draft. In the Figure 5, it shows that NMS will
--> --> send request to PCE
--> --> directly to get the path information and send service
--> request to the
--> --> head-end node. The request flow seems different from other
--> --> the four models.
--> --> Is it better to keep the consistency?
--> --> We could have NMS based service request to go head-end node
--> --> first and let
--> --> head-end node send request to PCE, thus all models will
--> --> have the same
--> --> message flows.
--> --> Does this make sense?
--> -->
--> --> Regards,
--> --> Lucy
--> -->
--> -->
--> -->
--> --> _______________________________________________
--> --> Pce mailing list
--> --> [email protected]
--> --> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
--> -->
-->
-->
_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
