IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [CCAMP] [CCAMP WG] #50: Identification of hexadecimal representation in G.709 vs decimal in GMPLS

Daniele Ceccarelli <daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com> Mon, 13 May 2013 08:03 UTC

Return-Path: <daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com>
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 C5A6D21F8D84 for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 May 2013 01:03:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.249
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 2iTIzuQuRbbB for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 May 2013 01:03:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailgw7.ericsson.se (mailgw7.ericsson.se [193.180.251.48]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F74121F8FB6 for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 May 2013 01:03:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb30-b7f3a6d0000007a4-79-51909e3cfe65
Received: from ESESSHC023.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.125]) by mailgw7.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 62.F0.01956.C3E90915; Mon, 13 May 2013 10:03:08 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from ESESSMB301.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.55]) by ESESSHC023.ericsson.se ([153.88.183.87]) with mapi id 14.02.0328.009; Mon, 13 May 2013 10:03:07 +0200
From: Daniele Ceccarelli <daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com>
To: "draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-g709-info-model@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-g709-info-model@tools.ietf.org>, "lberger@labn.net" <lberger@labn.net>
Thread-Topic: [CCAMP WG] #50: Identification of hexadecimal representation in G.709 vs decimal in GMPLS
Thread-Index: AQHOTBCPGsuJYF0jUUyiGzymCk+foZkCx0Ew
Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 08:03:07 +0000
Message-ID: <4A1562797D64E44993C5CBF38CF1BE480C70F8@ESESSMB301.ericsson.se>
References: <059.82d98e9dee0226e015a3852ed4c8eece@trac.tools.ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <059.82d98e9dee0226e015a3852ed4c8eece@trac.tools.ietf.org>
Accept-Language: it-IT, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [153.88.183.20]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFrrNLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+Jvra7NvAmBBtOWCFlMPXqMzeLJnBss FlNmf2ex6Gh+y+LA4rFkyU8mjw+bmtk8vlz+zBbAHMVlk5Kak1mWWqRvl8CVsfb8LcaC44IV t34eZm9g/MfbxcjJISFgIvHoyBJ2CFtM4sK99WxdjFwcQgKHGSW+/3vNBpIQEljMKNF6tqiL kYODTcBK4skhH5AaEYFZjBLPGy4xgtQwC0RKbPv4DmyQsECGxItnm5lBbBGBTIllJ2axQNhG Eos/3gCzWQRUJT6/Xgtm8wp4S+xtvc0MsctNonXBGiYQm1PAXeJK63+wOKOArMSE3YugdolL 3HoynwniaAGJJXvOM0PYohIvH/9jhbAVJa5OX84EUa8ncWPqFDYIW1ti2cLXzBB7BSVOznzC MoFRbBaSsbOQtMxC0jILScsCRpZVjOy5iZk56eXmmxiBEXRwy2+DHYyb7osdYpTmYFES503m agwUEkhPLEnNTk0tSC2KLyrNSS0+xMjEwSnVwNgvvrGJ5aiKWG9jzM6ujyd3m5a3Vn3qMWnd +Elw4i9j5S+8XtFCGkVfTNfMrQvqrZ2q0iDjWt3y3jrj1Tx1v+rilxtWsb0Vcgp/+vZI7Eoe ofOrzaWnbJuyo/SvR8Craka53YL3otn3O7flsVQpLdPe0LHvlIvq+b7AmYZhIYdOTrk1++ax I0osxRmJhlrMRcWJACj9bFVuAgAA
Cc: CCAMP <ccamp@ietf.org>, "ccamp-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <ccamp-chairs@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] [CCAMP WG] #50: Identification of hexadecimal representation in G.709 vs decimal in GMPLS
X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
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: Mon, 13 May 2013 08:03:14 -0000

Lou, CCAMP,

This is the proposed text for the info-model wrt the decimal vs hexadecimal encoding issue.



13.  Identification of hexadecimal representation in G.709 vs decimal in
     GMPLS considerations

   Encoding in GMPLS foresses the utilization of hexadecimal values
   format "0x" while in the data plane documents, like G.709
   reccomendation, the format usually used is the decimal one (e.g.
   G-PID in RSVP-TE vs Payload Type in G.709). 

BR
Daniele & Sergio

>-----Original Message-----
>From: ccamp issue tracker [mailto:trac+ccamp@trac.tools.ietf.org] 
>Sent: mercoledì 8 maggio 2013 19.22
>To: draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-g709-info-model@tools.ietf.org; 
>lberger@labn.net
>Cc: ccamp-chairs@tools.ietf.org
>Subject: [CCAMP WG] #50: Identification of hexadecimal 
>representation in G.709 vs decimal in GMPLS
>
>#50: Identification of hexadecimal representation in G.709 vs 
>decimal in GMPLS
>
> From: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ccamp/current/msg14812.html
>
>   The authors had previously stated the intent to just make this clear
>   in the signaling document.  I'd like to make an alternate proposal:
>   let's do the the obvious and have the documents simply use 
>the normal
>   (IETF) convention of using a '0x' prefix anytime a hexadecimal value
>   is represented. I believe this means that only the info-model draft
>   needs to be updated.
>
>-- 
>-------------------------------------+-------------------------
>---------
>-------------------------------------+---
> Reporter:  lberger@labn.net         |      Owner:  draft-ietf-ccamp-
>     Type:  task                     |  
>otn-g709-info-model@tools.ietf.org
> Priority:  major                    |     Status:  new
>Component:  otn-g709-info-model      |  Milestone:  Post WG Last Call
> Severity:  Waiting for Document     |    Version:
>  Update                             |   Keywords:
>-------------------------------------+-------------------------
>---------
>-------------------------------------+---
>
>Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/ccamp/trac/ticket/50>
>CCAMP WG <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/ccamp/> Common Control and 
>Measurement Plane Working Group
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email