i am not sure i understand exactly what is meant in this
requirement, so a response to my comment may be yes, that
fits with what we meant - we do not preclude ...
i figure it is worth discussing anyway.
> 3.19 Media Independence
>
> While it is an article of faith that IP operates over a
> wide variety of media (such as Ethernet, X.25, ATM, and
> so on), IP routing must take an agnostic view towards
> any "routing" or "topology" services that are offered
> by the medium over which IP is operating. That is, the
> new architecture MUST NOT be designed to integrate
> with any media-specific topology management or routing
> scheme.
maybe i have been spending too much time thining about it
lately, but it seems to me that the entire GMPLS
architecutre places some constriants on the routing
architecture that run counter to this requirement.
By saying MUST NOT integrate with media-specifc topology
management, nrarch-rrg seems to precluding some, if not
much, of the GMPLS architecutre.
i think it is important that the coming routing architecture
be able to create the routes used by the underlying media
layer. this means that the system has to take the native
capabilites of those layers into account and cannot be
completely, therfore, independent of them.
at that same time, it may not need to take these mechanisms
into account when merely doing an IP overlay, but when doing
routing using the raw structure, it will need to understand
and be dependent on capabilities, e.g. redundnacy and
restoration, that exist in many sub layers.
a.
-- Avri DoriaInstitute for System Technology Mobile: +46 73 029 8019 Lulea University of Technology Office: +46 920 49 3030 SE 971-87 Lulea avri@sm.luth.se Sweden
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Aug 04 2003 - 04:10:04 EDT