Re: [Bier] clarification in https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bier-architecture-08

[Tony Przygienda <[e-mail]>]

There are multiple encapsulations in the queue, it is better to clear it @
architectural level given our architecture has a flavor of "practical
design and implementation guidelines" which BTW, IMO is a very good thing
indeed ;-)

--- tony

On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 8:48 AM, matecs <[e-mail]> wrote:

> hi,
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bier-mpls-encapsulation/
> is not in the rfc-editor queue and also tells
> things about bitstring encoding in section 2.1.2.
> so if there is a will to clarify byte order,
> that draft probably easier to deal with...
> regards,
> cs
>
>
> On 10/30/2017 04:26 PM, Tony Przygienda wrote:
>
>> I suggest to add a mention/reference on AUTH48 since I got the question
>> 2-3 times already from different parties.
>>
>> Network byte order is normally specified up to 32 and 64 bits (well,
>> maybe 128 if one dealt with SIMD) but BIER takes it into a much longer
>> space so it's not necessarily evident.
>>
>> --- tony
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 7:31 AM, Alia Atlas <[e-mail] <mailto:
>> [e-mail]>> wrote:
>>
>>     Hi Csaba,
>>
>>     Thanks for letting us know that you are developing bier for
>>     freerouter.nop.hu <http://freerouter.nop.hu>.
>>     I am expecting a number of other relevant drafts to be progressing
>>     out of the
>>     BIER WG soon - so this would be a really excellent time to read
>>     through and
>>     provide feedback.
>>
>>     As Acee's email indicated, we always assume Network Byte Order.
>>  This particular
>>     draft is already to the RFC Editor for publication, but during
>>     Auth48 it may be possible
>>     to add a brief mention that it is in Network Byte Order.
>>
>>     Regards,
>>     Alia
>>
>>     On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 1:38 AM, matecs <[e-mail]
>>     <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>>
>>         hi,
>>         i'm developing bier for freerouter.nop.hu
>>         <http://freerouter.nop.hu>, and during this process,
>>         i found that bitstring encoding is not fully clarified in the
>>         drafts.
>>         especially, the byte order of bitstring is not specified anywhere.
>>         so allow me to suggest a small addition to the arch draft
>>         to section 3, below the current two bullets, a third one:
>>
>>         * BitString encoding is big endian (msb) on the wire. It means
>> that
>>            if you have to send to BFR-id 1, then you have to set the
>> lowest
>>            bit in the last byte in the BitString.
>>
>>         thanks,
>>         csaba mate
>>         niif/hungarnet
>>
>>         _______________________________________________
>>         BIER mailing list
>>         [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>         https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bier
>>         <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bier>
>>
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     BIER mailing list
>>     [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bier
>>     <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bier>
>>
>>
>>