Re: [CCAMP] Confirming plan for Issue #48: (Was: Closing G.709 open issues)

[John E Drake <[e-mail]>]

What is behind your preoccupation with enumerating all possible combinations of length & TSG?  Do you have trouble with arithmetic?

Sent from my iPhone

On May 20, 2013, at 1:42 PM, "Lou Berger" <[e-mail]> wrote:

> 
> 
> On 5/20/2013 3:18 PM, John E Drake wrote:
>> I think that's a big mistake(tm).  If a new rate or TSG is introduced
>> the RFC would need to be updated even though the encoding does not
>> require it.
> 
> Well that's easily addressed, via something like:
> 
> Length (12 bits): indicates the number of bits of the Bit Map field,
> i.e., the number of TS in the HO ODUk link.  The TS granularity,
> 1.25Gbps or 2.5Gbps, may be derived by dividing the HO ODUk link's rate
> by the value of the Length field.  In the context of [G709-2012], the
> values of 4 and 16 indicate a TS granularity of 2.5Gps, and the values
> 2, 8, 32 and 80 indicate a TS granularity of 1.25Gps.
> 
> Lou
> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>> On May 20, 2013, at 2:43 PM, "Lou Berger" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> 
>>> John,
>>> There's still some ambiguity here.  How about:
>>> On 5/20/2013 9:15 AM, John E Drake wrote:
>>>> Length (12 bits): indicates the number of bits of the Bit Map field,
>>>> i.e., the number of TS in the HO ODUk link.  The TS granularity,
>>>> 1.25Gbps or 2.5Gbps, may be derived by dividing the HO ODUk link's
>>>> rate by the value of the Length field.  
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Replace:
>>>> For example, for an HO ODU2
>>>> link, whose link rate is 10Gbps, the value of the Length field will
>>>> be either 4 or 8 and the TS granularity will be either 2.5Gbps or
>>>> 1.25Gbps, respectively.
>>> With:
>>> 
>>>  The values of 4 and 16 indicate a TS granularity of 2.5Gps, while
>>>  the values 2, 8, 32 and 80 indicate a TS granularity of 1.25Gps.
>>> 
>>> Lou
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> Irrespectively Yours,
>>>> 
>>>> John
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Lou Berger [mailto:[e-mail]]
>>>>> Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 1:33 PM
>>>>> To: John E Drake
>>>>> Cc: Fatai Zhang; [e-mail];
>>>>> CCAMP; [e-mail]
>>>>> Subject: Re: [CCAMP] Confirming plan for Issue #48: (Was: Closing G.709
>>>>> open issues)
>>>>> 
>>>>> John,
>>>>>   I guess you haven't been paying attention!  The rewrite
>>>>> originated from Daniele, was tweaked by me and then fixed by Fatai.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Do you have an alternate proposal to address issue#48?
>>>>> Issue #48="In signaling document section 6: Clarify related text [i.e.,
>>>>> the OLD text] to unambiguously identify the relationship between label
>>>>> length and TSG."
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Lou
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 5/17/2013 1:15 PM, John E Drake wrote:
>>>>>> Lou,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I think the original text is fine and your attempted re-write
>>>>> completely mangled its meaning.  The label is a bit vector whose length
>>>>> is equal to the ODUk rate / TSG.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Irrespectively Yours,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> John
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>> From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On
>>>>>>> Behalf Of Lou Berger
>>>>>>> Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 9:17 AM
>>>>>>> To: Fatai Zhang
>>>>>>> Cc: [e-mail]; CCAMP;
>>>>>>> draft- [e-mail]
>>>>>>> Subject: [CCAMP] Confirming plan for Issue #48: (Was: Closing G.709
>>>>>>> open issues)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Authors/WG,
>>>>>>>   From the mail on the list it seems to me that we've reached
>>>>> closure
>>>>>>> on Issue #48: "Document no explicit indication of TSG in the label"
>>>>>>> (http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/ccamp/trac/ticket/48).  I'd like to
>>>>>>> confirm my reading.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> As I read the list, this issue will be resolved by making the
>>>>>>> following change to draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> OLD
>>>>>>> Note that the
>>>>>>> Length field in the label format MAY be used to indicate the TS
>>>>>>> type of the HO ODUk (i.e., TS granularity at 1.25Gbps or 2.5Gbps)
>>>>>>> since the HO ODUk type can be known from IF_ID RSVP_HOP Object. In
>>>>>>> some cases when there is no Link Management Protocol (LMP) or
>>>>>>> routing to make the two end points of the link to know the TSG,
>>>>>>> the TSG information used by another end can be deduced from the
>>>>>>> label format. For example, for HO ODU2 link, the value of the
>>>>>>> length filed will be 4 or 8, which indicates the TS granularity is
>>>>>>> 2.5Gbps or 1.25Gbps, respectively.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> NEW
>>>>>>> Please note that the TS granularity of an HO ODUk can be inferred
>>>>>>> from
>>>>>>> the length of the label. The values of 4 and 16 indicate a TS
>>>>>>> granularity of 2.5Gps, while the values 2, 8, 32 and 80 indicate a
>>>>> TS
>>>>>>> granularity of 1.25Gps.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Please speak up if you disagree with this resolution.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Lou
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 5/9/2013 9:41 PM, Fatai Zhang wrote:
>>>>>>>> For point 1), "1" should be dropped and "7" should be corrected to
>>>>>>> "8" in your proposed text.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> CCAMP mailing list
>>>>>>> [e-mail]
>>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp
>