Re: [CCAMP] Last Call: <draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-11.txt> (Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Extensions for the evolving G.709 Optical Transport Networks Control) to Proposed Standard

"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Wed, 21 August 2013 10:12 UTC

Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 675BD11E81FE; Wed, 21 Aug 2013 03:12:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.571
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.571 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.027, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id day94XmTs7Rz; Wed, 21 Aug 2013 03:12:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp4.iomartmail.com (asmtp4.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.175]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E598E11E8101; Wed, 21 Aug 2013 03:12:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp4.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp4.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r7LACSwV032503; Wed, 21 Aug 2013 11:12:28 +0100
Received: from 950129200 (dsl-sp-81-140-15-32.in-addr.broadbandscope.com [81.140.15.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp4.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r7LACPwc032470 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 21 Aug 2013 11:12:26 +0100
From: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: "'Fatai Zhang'" <zhangfatai@huawei.com>, <ietf@ietf.org>
References: <00fe01ce9dd6$2dc59a10$8950ce30$@olddog.co.uk> <F82A4B6D50F9464B8EBA55651F541CF85AF38E3A@SZXEML552-MBS.china.huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <F82A4B6D50F9464B8EBA55651F541CF85AF38E3A@SZXEML552-MBS.china.huawei.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2013 11:12:24 +0100
Message-ID: <008e01ce9e56$ef180d30$cd482790$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_008F_01CE9E5F.50DFF7A0"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQIsbNb5TgnC0suQ8+Rs20wgK20xygJciecUmNDvnBA=
Content-Language: en-gb
Cc: ccamp@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] Last Call: <draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-11.txt> (Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Extensions for the evolving G.709 Optical Transport Networks Control) to Proposed Standard
X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group <ccamp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ccamp>
List-Post: <mailto:ccamp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2013 10:12:46 -0000

Hi Fatai,
 
I think you nicely answered your own questions :-)
 
I would suggest adding a small section including all of the statements you made
in your email. (Well, no need to refer to Berlin and the CCAMP chairs :-)
 
Cheers,
Adrian
 
From: Fatai Zhang [mailto:zhangfatai@huawei.com] 
Sent: 21 August 2013 08:40
To: adrian@olddog.co.uk; ietf@ietf.org
Cc: ccamp@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [CCAMP] Last Call: <draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-11.txt>
(Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Extensions for the
evolving G.709 Optical Transport Networks Control) to Proposed Standard
 
Hi Adrian,
 
Thanks very much. 
 
I can update the nits and editorial issues quickly, but I would like to discuss
more with you for the following points to make things clear before I update the
draft. 
 
================================================================================
=========
Please consider and note what updates to GMPLS management tools are needed.
 
[Fatai]This has been mentioned in [Framework] document. Did you mean that we
need add one sentence in some place of this document to refer to [Framework]
document to mention management tools?
 
Are there any changes to the Alarms that might arise? We have a document for
that.
 
[Fatai] No. RFC4783 is still applicable.
 
Are there any changes to the way OAM is controlled? We have a document for that.
 
[Fatai] No, it could be done through NMS or
[draft-ietf-ccamp-rsvp-te-sdh-otn-oam-ext].
 
Should the new G-PIDs show in the TC MIB managed by IANA at
https://www.iana.org/assignments/ianagmplstc-mib/ianagmplstc-mib.xhtml
This should happen automgically when the feeding registries are updated
but it is probably best to add a specific request for IANA.
 
[Fatai] Will do that.
 
Will other MIB work be needed (in the future) to make it possible to 
read new information (labels, tspecs) from network devices?
 
[Fatai] I am not sure. I asked the similar question (not on this draft) during
Berlin meeting. The chairs answered that it could be driven by drafts.
 
 
 
Best Regards
 
Fatai
 
-----Original Message-----
From: ccamp-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ccamp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Adrian
Farrel
Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2013 2:51 AM
To: ietf@ietf.org
Cc: ccamp@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] Last Call: <draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-11.txt>
(Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Extensions for the
evolving G.709 Optical Transport Networks Control) to Proposed Standard
 
As sponsoring AD I have the following last call comments I hope you will take on
board.
 
Thanks,
Adrian
 
Please fix the two lines that are too long (see idnits)
 
---
 
Please expand "OTN" on first use in the main text.
Please expand "TS" on its first use.
 
---
 
6.2
 
   The ingress node of an LSP MAY include Label ERO (Explicit Route 
   Object) to indicate the label in each hops along the path.
 
Missing "subobject".
 
---
 
6.2.1
 
   When an upstream node receives a Resv message containing an 
   GENERALIZED_LABEL object
 
s/an/a/
 
---
 
Please consider and note what updates to GMPLS management tools are
needed.
 
Are there any changes to the Alarms that might arise? We have a document
for that.
 
Are there any changes to the way OAM is controlled? We have a document
for that.
 
Should the new G-PIDs show in the TC MIB managed by IANA at
https://www.iana.org/assignments/ianagmplstc-mib/ianagmplstc-mib.xhtml
This should happen automgically when the feeding registries are updated
but it is probably best to add a specific request for IANA.
 
Will other MIB work be needed (in the future) to make it possible to 
read new information (labels, tspecs) from network devices?
 
---
 
Please fix so that you have three sections:
 
Authors' Addresses (only those people on the front page)
Contributors (other people who made significant text contributions to
the document)
Acknowledgements (other people who helped with the work)
 
---
 
[OTN-OSPF] should be a normative reference for its use to define the 
value of the switching type used in signaling.
 
_______________________________________________
CCAMP mailing list
CCAMP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp