Re: Comments on the L2 VPN framework and solutions documents

Mick> Of course the IEEE model doesn't require all provider bridges to be on
Mick> the  same emulated  LAN,  only  all those  that  are optimising  their
Mick> control traffic by  sharing its results between them  - i.e. just like
Mick> ordinary LAN. So VPLS's that are on the *same* underlying connectivity
Mick> can  share  that knowledge  and  don't  have  to suffer  BPDU  sending
Mick> inefficiency. 

So the difference between  the IEEE model and the FW model  is that the IEEE
model allows this optimization.  But I don't quite understand how to benefit
from this optimization in the  VPLS environment.  A particular set of VPLSes
could only be considered to have the same "underlying connectivity" if it is
known that they  are supported by the same  set of PEs, both now  and in the
future.  I'm not  sure whether this is a common enough  case to worry about,
and  I'm  also  not  sure  how  one would  get  this  information  from  the
auto-discovery provisioning model.