Re: [CCAMP] 答复: WG Last Call on draft-ietf-ccamp-flexible-grid-ospf-ext-04

[Dieter Beller <[e-mail]>]

Hi Haomian,

thanks for you swift reply.

Here is my suggestion: add the following 2 sentences at the end of the last paragraph in section 4.1:

As  the "Max LSP Bandwidth at priority x" fields in the generic part of the Interface Switching Capability
Descriptor [RFC4203] are not meaningful for flex-grid DWDM links, the values of these fields MUST be set
to zero and MUST be ignored. The Switching Capability Specific Information as defined below provides the corresponding information for flex-grid DWDM links.


Thanks,
Dieter

On 01.07.2016 09:03, Zhenghaomian wrote:

Hi, Dieter,

 

Thanks for your comments, please see my reply inline:

 

 

 

发件人: CCAMP [mailto:[e-mail]] 代表 Dieter Beller
发送时间: 2016年6月30日 16:50
收件人: Fatai Zhang; CCAMP ([e-mail])
主题: Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-ccamp-flexible-grid-ospf-ext-04

 

Hi Fatai, CCAMPers,

I've reviewed this document and I have the following comment:

Section 4.1:

4.1. ISCD Extensions for Flexi-grid

         Value                       Type

         -----                       ----

      152 (TBA by IANA)           Flexi-Grid-LSC capable

   Switching Capability and Encoding values MUST be used as follows:

              Switching Capability = Flexi-Grid-LSC

              Encoding Type = lambda [as defined in https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3471" rel="nofollow">RFC3471]

   When Switching Capability and Encoding fields are set to values as

   stated above, the Interface Switching Capability Descriptor MUST be

   interpreted as in [https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4203" rel="nofollow">RFC4203] with the optional inclusion of one or

   more Switching Capability Specific Information sub-TLVs.

draft-ietf-ccamp-flexible-grid-ospf-ext-04 defines the Switching Capability Specific Information sub-TLVs, but the ISCD as defined
in RFC4203 contains "Max LSP Bandwidth at priority x" fields in the  generic ISCD part and these fields do IMHO not make
sense for flex grid (see below). The draft does not say how these fields shall be filled.
[Haomian] I agree with what you said, the ‘Max LSP Bandwidth at priority x’ don’t make sense for flexi-grid, so we need to skip this in ISCD section. You are right we need to specify how to fill in even if we skip this section. How about we add the following statement in the end of section 4.1?

Given the Switching Capability set to Flexi-Grid-LSC, the ‘Max LSP Bandwidth at priority x (x from 0 to 7)’ defined in [RFC4203] MUST be fulfilled with 0 and ignored.

Do you think it’s clear enough?

Excerpt from RFC4203:

1.4.  Interface Switching Capability Descriptor

   The Interface Switching Capability Descriptor is a sub-TLV (of type

   15) of the Link TLV.  The length is the length of value field in

   octets.  The format of the value field is as shown below:

    0                   1                   2                   3

    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   | Switching Cap |   Encoding    |           Reserved            |

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 0              |

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 1              |

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 2              |

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 3              |

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 4              |

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 5              |

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 6              |

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 7              |

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   |        Switching Capability-specific information              |

   |                  (variable)                                   |

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   The Switching Capability (Switching Cap) field contains one of the

   following values:

      1     Packet-Switch Capable-1 (PSC-1)

      2     Packet-Switch Capable-2 (PSC-2)

      3     Packet-Switch Capable-3 (PSC-3)

      4     Packet-Switch Capable-4 (PSC-4)

      51    Layer-2 Switch Capable  (L2SC)

      100   Time-Division-Multiplex Capable (TDM)

      150   Lambda-Switch Capable   (LSC)

      200   Fiber-Switch Capable    (FSC)

   The Encoding field contains one of the values specified in https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4203#section-3.1.1" rel="nofollow">Section

   https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4203#section-3.1.1" rel="nofollow">3.1.1 of [https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4203#ref-GMPLS-SIG" title='"Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Functional Description"' rel="nofollow">GMPLS-SIG].

   Maximum LSP Bandwidth is encoded as a list of eight 4 octet fields in

   the IEEE floating point format [https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4203#ref-IEEE" title='"IEEE Standard for Binary Floating-Point Arithmetic"' rel="nofollow">IEEE], with priority 0 first and

   priority 7 last.  The units are bytes (not bits!) per second.

   The content of the Switching Capability specific information field

   depends on the value of the Switching Capability field.

Minor nits:

page 5 typo:
'Chanel Spacing' instead of 'Channel Spacing'

[Haomian] Thanks, will update in the next version.

page 7 editorial:
'Flexi-Grid-LSC capable': capable should be removed (already included in the LSC abbreviation).

[Haomian] Thanks, will use ‘Flexi-Grid-LSC’ instead of ‘Flexi-Grid-LSC capable’, the replacement will also be applied in other a few places in the draft.

Thanks,
Dieter

On 25.06.2016 04:35, Fatai Zhang wrote:

Hi all,

 

This starts a two week working group last call on [draft-ietf-ccamp-flexible-grid-ospf-ext-04].

 

The working group last call ends on Friday, July 8th. Please send your comments to the CCAMP mailing list.

 

As is always the case, positive comments, e.g., "I've reviewed this document and believe it is ready for publication", are welcome. This is useful and important, even from authors.

 

Since the WG chairs and secretary are co-authors/co-contributor of this draft, if anyone is willing to be the shepherd of the document, please volunteer.

 

Note that no IPR was disclosed against this document.

 

 

 

Thanks

 

Fatai and Daniele

 

_______________________________________________

CCAMP mailing list

[e-mail]

https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp" rel="nofollow">https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp