Great. So the question now is that do we see a merit in including this encapsulation? If Yes, then this would entail some minor changes in the RSVP 1588_LSP object as well (or perhaps the existing offset in the PTP_LSP object can be used?).
Cheers, Manav > -----Original Message----- > From: Tony Li [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2011 11.01 PM > To: [email protected] > Cc: Bhatia, Manav (Manav); [email protected] > Subject: Re: [TICTOC] Updating draft-ietf-tictoc-1588overmpls > > > Unless something has changed radically, IEEE has no say in > what happens after the Ethertype. > > Tony > > > On Apr 27, 2011, at 10:14 AM, Stewart Bryant wrote: > > > IEEE1588 worked with a number of organizations to map PTP > over their protocols. > > > > It seems unlikely that IEEE would object to the definition > of a mapping to MPLS if the consensus was that this was the > best way to carry PTP over an MPLS network. > > > > Obviously we should ask before publishing a specification, > but the most important starting point is to figure out the > best technical solution to the problem in hand. > > > > Stewart (speaking as an individual contributor. > > > > > > > > On 27/04/2011 15:25, Bhatia, Manav (Manav) wrote: > >> Yup, thats what i had meant - that it would require > getting IEEE involved and we should only tread down that path > if its really really required. > >> > >> Cheers, Manav > >> > >> From: Roberts, Peter (Peter) > >> Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2011 7.32 PM > >> To: Bhatia, Manav (Manav); Shahram Davari; [email protected] > >> Subject: RE: Updating draft-ietf-tictoc-1588overmpls > >> > >> > >> Manav, > >> Can you please provide a bit more background to the statement: > >> I believe we had discussed that IETF cannot define new > encapsulations in Prague? > >> This is probably true that it would require a stamp of > approval from IEEE but that needs to be verified. > >> Peter R> > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Bhatia, Manav (Manav) > >> Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2011 7:41 PM > >> To: Shahram Davari; [email protected] > >> Subject: Re: [TICTOC] Updating draft-ietf-tictoc-1588overmpls > >> > >> Yup, will do that. > >> > >> Cheers, Manav > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- > >> > From: Shahram Davari [mailto:[email protected]] > >> > Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2011 5.08 AM > >> > To: Bhatia, Manav (Manav); [email protected] > >> > Subject: RE: Updating draft-ietf-tictoc-1588overmpls > >> > > >> > Manav, > >> > > >> > In MPLS-TP the P2MP should work fine since it is all > >> > configured by management. May be just add some text that says > >> > using MPLS control plane the co-routing of the forward and > >> > reverse direction is not possible but using management plane > >> > this is possible such as in case of MPLS-TP. > >> > > >> > Thx > >> > Shahram > >> > > >> > -----Original Message----- > >> > From: Bhatia, Manav (Manav) > [mailto:[email protected]] > >> > Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2011 4:35 PM > >> > To: [email protected] > >> > Cc: Shahram Davari > >> > Subject: Updating draft-ietf-tictoc-1588overmpls > >> > > >> > Folks, > >> > > >> > I am working on updating draft-ietf-tictoc-1588overmpls as > >> > per the WG feedback. > >> > > >> > As part of this I will change the OSPF and IS-IS capabilities > >> > to be per link as against per node that its currently defined as. > >> > > >> > Will also clarify that FCS retention for the payload Ethernet > >> > described in [RFC4720] MUST not be used. > >> > > >> > Should I remove Sec 5.3 "1588 over pure MPLS mode" as I > >> > believe we had discussed that IETF cannot define new > >> > encapsulations in Prague? > >> > > >> > I will also add some verbiage that P2MP LSPs may not work as > >> > they only provide unidirectional traffic flow and cannot > >> > guarantee a symmetrical path back to the head nodes. > >> > > >> > Anything else? > >> > > >> > Cheers, Manav > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Manav Bhatia, > >> > Service Router Product Group (SRPG) > >> > Alcatel-Lucent, India > >> > > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > >> TICTOC mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tictoc > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> TICTOC mailing list > >> > >> [email protected] > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tictoc > > > > > > -- > > For corporate legal information go to: > > > > > > http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > TICTOC mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tictoc > > _______________________________________________ TICTOC mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tictoc
