Hi Jim,

ok - we can also get some additional feedback from the WG meeting (I've
added a bullet asking for a discussion on "plain" IP-over-MPLS
encapsulation support to the update on
draft-ietf-softwire-gateway-init-ds-lite). 

BTW/ - it would help the discussion if you could provide the paragraph
you're thinking of to the alias.

Thanks, Frank

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Guichard [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Monday, March 28, 2011 7:18 PM
> To: Frank Brockners (fbrockne)
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Softwires] draft-ietf-softwire-gateway-init-ds-list-02
> 
> Hi Frank,
> 
> What I would like to see is the ability to use TE without VPN's. I do
> not
> want to be forced to deploy VPN infrastructure in this case. RSVP-TE
is
> an
> important piece of the puzzle as it provides the ability to steer
> traffic
> based upon policy that I may wish to enforce. I would be happy to
> supply
> text for the draft but would like to agree on this alias before doing
> so ..
> 
> On 3/27/11 7:53 AM, "Frank Brockners (fbrockne)" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> 
> >
> >Jim,
> >
> >why is VPN "overkill" (kind of delicate wording these days...)? TE
> could
> >also be combined with MPLS VPNs.
> >
> >Would also be interested in other folks' thoughts on the need for
> >"plain" IP-over-MPLS tunnels.
> >
> >Thanks, Frank
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Jim Guichard [mailto:[email protected]]
> >> Sent: Friday, March 25, 2011 8:03 PM
> >> To: Frank Brockners (fbrockne)
> >> Cc: [email protected]
> >> Subject: Re: [Softwires]
draft-ietf-softwire-gateway-init-ds-list-02
> >>
> >> VPN is overkill imho plus i want the ability to engineer traffic
> paths
> >> and for this i need TE
> >>
> >> Jim Guichard
> >>
> >> Principal Networking Architect
> >> IPG CTO Office
> >> Juniper Networks
> >>
> >> CCIE #2069
> >>
> >> Sent from my iphone
> >>
> >> On Mar 25, 2011, at 5:17, "Frank Brockners (fbrockne)"
> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi Jim,
> >> >
> >> > fully agreed that MPLS should not be absent from the draft, and
it
> >is
> >> > not. The current draft-ietf-softwire-gateway-init-ds-list-03
> doesn't
> >> > restrict things to IP tunneling. The draft already allows for
MPLS
> >> > transport between Gateway and AFTR using MPLS VPNs.
> >> >
> >> > Hence the question: For the use cases you have in mind, couldn't
> we
> >> just
> >> > use MPLS VPNs (possibly even point-to-point with just two PEs in
a
> >> VPN -
> >> > Gateway and the AFTR)? Personally I've nothing against additional
> >> > encapsulations, though so far there's always been a push in the
WG
> >> (and
> >> > also in 3GPP SA2) to keep the number of encapsulations to a
> minimum
> >> > (e.g. L2TPv3 was dropped from the list of encaps, because we
could
> >do
> >> > the very same thing with GRE).
> >> >
> >> > On multicast: Don't fully follow your thought below. Do you
> consider
> >> > running multicast over the softwire between AFTR and Gateway? The
> >> > multicast considerations for GI-DS-lite (see
> >> > draft-brockners-softwire-mcast-gi-ds-lite-00) so far assume that
> >this
> >> > would not be the case.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks, Frank
> >> >
> >> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> >> From: Jim Guichard [mailto:[email protected]]
> >> >> Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2011 9:43 PM
> >> >>
> >> >> Hi Frank,
> >> >>
> >> >> bi-directional tunnels are necessary if you wish for traffic
> flows
> >> to
> >> >> take
> >> >> the same path in both directions across the network. It is
> possible
> >> to
> >> >> use
> >> >> point-to-point but this is cumbersome to deploy.
> >Point-to-multipoint
> >> >> may
> >> >> be necessary for multicast.
> >> >>
> >> >> Clearly IP-in-MPLS tunneling is a fundamental requirement that
> >> should
> >> >> not
> >> >> be absent from the draft. If an operator has MPLS why restrict
> them
> >> to
> >> >> IP
> >> >> tunneling?
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> to kick-start the discussion, could you outline the usage
> >scenarios
> >> >> that
> >> >>> would drive the requirements you mention below?
> >> >>>
> >> >

_______________________________________________
Softwires mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires

Reply via email to