Thanks Ron.

Please pardon my ignorance, but what's the benefit of this over doing an 
EthernetPW?  

Tony


On Jul 9, 2010, at 10:27 PM, Ron Cohen wrote:

> Hi Tony,
> 
> PTP is designed to be extended over multiple transports. Some transports are 
> included in IEEE1588-2008 Annex-s, while the idea was that others (such as 
> MPLS) will be developed by the expert standardization bodies.
> 
> I wrote a proposal a while ago for direct PTP over MPLS mapping. It is still 
> available here http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ronc-ptp-mpls-00 . At least 
> part of it still makes sense.
> 
> Best,
> Ron
> 
> On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 10:41 PM, Tony Li <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> And, how can the encapsulation be anything other than EthernetPW?
> 
> Tony
> 
> 
> On Jul 9, 2010, at 12:38 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > Hi Yaakov,
> >
> > when you say encapsulation what is the intention e.g. at the interface?
> >
> > Mike
> > ________________________________
> > From: [email protected] [[email protected]] On Behalf Of Yaakov 
> > Stein [[email protected]]
> > Sent: 09 July 2010 05:06
> > To: [email protected]; [email protected]; 
> > [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: [TICTOC] FW: 1588 over MPLS draft
> >
> > Sebastien
> >
> > Yes, developing an MPLS encapsulation for 1588 is high on TICTOC's list of 
> > things to accomplish.
> >
> > Y(J)S
> >
> > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of 
> > [email protected]
> > Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2010 18:37
> > To: [email protected]; [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: [TICTOC] FW: 1588 over MPLS draft
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > After reading this interesting draft, I would have some questions for 
> > clarification (sorry, I will not attend to the Maastricht meeting).
> >
> > My first general question is related to the objective of TICTOC regarding 
> > this topic: is it planned that TICTOC would develop a specific mechanism 
> > for transporting PTP over MPLS as the one proposed in this document? If so, 
> > is it oriented to telecoms applications, or to other types of applications?
> >
> > My second question would be to better understand why there is a need for 
> > transporting PTP over MPLS. It is still unclear to me. FYI, similar 
> > discussions happened in June in ITU-T Q13/15 during the last Geneva meeting.
> >
> > My understanding of the context of this draft is that the network between a 
> > PTP master and a PTP slave experiences full timing support for PTP, such as 
> > TC in every node (or possibly BC, that is also slightly evoked in the 
> > document?). In this context, it can be questioned if the PTP timing 
> > delivery is really done "end-to-end", since every node has to process the 
> > PTP messages. Therefore, is it really appropriate in this case to put the 
> > PTP messages into a tunneling transport, such as MPLS?
> >
> > It looks more logical to me in this situation to transport the PTP timing 
> > flows outside MPLS (e.g. simply over UDP/IP) on a hop-by-hop basis (e.g. 
> > each node delivers its timing to the next one).
> > But maybe I misunderstood or missed something...
> >
> > Any thoughts?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > BR,
> >
> > Sébastien
> > ________________________________
> > De : [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] De la part de 
> > Shahram Davari
> > Envoyé : mercredi 7 juillet 2010 21:36
> > À : [email protected]
> > Objet : [TICTOC] FW: 1588 over MPLS draft
> >
> >
> > From: Shahram Davari
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2010 12:12 PM
> > To: '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'
> > Subject: 1588 over MPLS draft
> >
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Please find attached our first draft of 1588 over MPLS. Since we have some 
> > technical issues converting the Word format to Txt we couldn’t  upload the 
> > draft before the cut-off date. However we will present the draft in the 
> > next IETF meeting and will upload the draft after the meeting.
> >
> > Note that the main WG is TicToc but may require consultation with MPLS and 
> > PWE3 WGs.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Shahram Davari
> > _______________________________________________
> > TICTOC mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tictoc
> 
> _______________________________________________
> TICTOC mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tictoc
> 

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

Reply via email to