Re: TE/CT Configuration scalability

The other possibility is for someone to propose a "standard" mapping.   
For
anti-trust reasons, I don't believe that this would be best coming from  
a
non-carrier.  For IETF reasons, I believe that this would be best if it
was proposed as "one possible" mapping, not _THE DEFINITIVE SINGULAR_  
mapping.

Tony


On Jul 1, 2004, at 7:55 AM, Jim Boyle wrote:

>
> See
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-tewg-interas-mpls-te- 
> req-07.txt
>
> Section 5.1.7, this references section 4.1, of
>
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-tewg-diff-te-proto 
> -07.txt
>
> which doesn't exist.
>
> Also
>
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-tewg-interarea-mpls-te- 
> req-02.txt
>
> Section 7.11
>
> For interarea - I don't see a problem, as it's one administrative  
> domain.
>
> For interas - there may need to be use of diff-serv mpls signalling, or
> "careful" coordination between domains.
>
> Jim
>
> On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 [email protected] wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> draft-ietf-tewg-diff-te-proto-07, "Protocol extensions for support of
>> Differentiated-Service-aware MPLS Traffic Engineering" states:-
>>
>> "To ensure coherent DS-TE operation, the network administrator MUST
>> configure exactly the same TE-Class Mapping on all LSRs of the DS-TE
>> domain"
>>
>> How does this idea of identical TE/CT configuration work over multiple
>> domains? Is there any possibility of interoperability?
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Lionel Silman,  System, Optical Networks Division, ECI Telecom
>> Tel    Work: +972 (3) 9266007; Home: +972 (3) 6417464
>>
>>
>
> -- 
>
>