Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call Comments on "GMPLS Enhancement for Signal and Network Element Compatibility of Wavelength Switched Optical Networks"
Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> Fri, 07 February 2014 17:33 UTC
Return-Path: <lberger@labn.net>
X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1BE61A0025 for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 09:33:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id N0cNoozVGqOg for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 09:33:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alt-proxy7.mail.unifiedlayer.com (alt-proxy7.mail.unifiedlayer.com [74.220.218.8]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 7A4971A0166 for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Feb 2014 09:33:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 3931 invoked by uid 0); 7 Feb 2014 17:32:39 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO box313.bluehost.com) (69.89.31.113) by oproxy1.mail.unifiedlayer.com with SMTP; 7 Feb 2014 17:32:39 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=labn.net; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:CC:To:MIME-Version:From:Date:Message-ID; bh=a9CK7kUBERbjJBKwBQTXwx1MJeyNy4Zh46tIE4wJGSM=; b=PedPITXpB50caWKitfunz7kwn8R2DC+etpWBRlSYUk5M3uBxAAPeGW26nWTv+V2+3JLvE4vkxNcH+AGIhJXKez/YeZxP1txiZVL+LL7rsLTni7O7AC0HgeBSFCjDNi8b;
Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113]:46611 helo=[127.0.0.1]) by box313.bluehost.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <lberger@labn.net>) id 1WBpI6-0003pB-NT; Fri, 07 Feb 2014 10:32:38 -0700
Message-ID: <52F518B3.5090403@labn.net>
Date: Fri, 07 Feb 2014 12:32:35 -0500
From: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Leeyoung <leeyoung@huawei.com>, Acee Lindem <acee.lindem@ericsson.com>
References: <94A203EA12AECE4BA92D42DBFFE0AE47030B0E4A@eusaamb101.ericsson.se> <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E1729BB5F34@dfweml706-chm.china.huawei.com> <06D60676-4C54-4D18-AD96-F436E7C39DEC@ericsson.com> <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E1729BB6E79@dfweml706-chm.china.huawei.com> <52F5084F.7010506@labn.net> <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E1729BB72C0@dfweml706-chm.china.huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E1729BB72C0@dfweml706-chm.china.huawei.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Identified-User: {1038:box313.bluehost.com:labnmobi:labn.net} {sentby:smtp auth 69.89.31.113 authed with lberger@labn.net}
Cc: CCAMP <ccamp@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call Comments on "GMPLS Enhancement for Signal and Network Element Compatibility of Wavelength Switched Optical Networks"
X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Fri, 07 Feb 2014 17:33:42 -0000
Young, I suspect you might make a change or two based on my previous mail on the encoding document. Once any such changes are made, I think you'll be good to submit. BTW The summary is needed on published versions only. Lou On 2/7/2014 11:37 AM, Leeyoung wrote: > Hi Lou, > > My bad, here's the working version with correction. Let me know if this is ready to publish with a summary of changes. > > Thanks, > Young > > -----Original Message----- > From: Lou Berger [mailto:lberger@labn.net] > Sent: Friday, February 07, 2014 10:23 AM > To: Leeyoung; Acee Lindem > Cc: CCAMP > Subject: Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call Comments on "GMPLS Enhancement for Signal and Network Element Compatibility of Wavelength Switched Optical Networks" > > > Young, > You missed this comment: > > CURRENT: > The format of Label is required of the use of the label format > defined in [RFC6205] for interfaces advertised with WSON-LSC. > NEW > The label format defined in [RFC6205] MUST be used when > advertising interfaces with a WSON-LSC type Switching Capability. > > Lou > > On 2/6/2014 2:40 PM, Leeyoung wrote: >> Hi Acee and Lou, >> >> >> >> Here's the working document and the idnits results. >> >> >> >> Acee, Please see inline for my comments to your comments. I have >> incorporated all your comments except one - I need your clarification. >> >> >> >> Thanks. >> >> Young >> >> >> >> *From:*Acee Lindem [mailto:acee.lindem@ericsson.com] >> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 05, 2014 4:11 PM >> *To:* Leeyoung >> *Cc:* CCAMP >> *Subject:* Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call Comments on "GMPLS Enhancement for >> Signal and Network Element Compatibility of Wavelength Switched >> Optical Networks" >> >> >> >> Hi Young, >> >> >> >> On Feb 3, 2014, at 7:21 PM, Leeyoung <leeyoung@huawei.com >> <mailto:leeyoung@huawei.com>> wrote: >> >> >> >> Hi Acee, >> >> >> >> Here's my comments inline on your comments. >> >> >> >> Thanks. >> >> Young >> >> >> >> *From:* ccamp-bounces@ietf.org >> <mailto:ccamp-bounces@ietf.org> [mailto:ccamp-bounces@ietf.org] *On >> Behalf Of *Acee Lindem >> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 29, 2013 5:16 PM >> *To:* CCAMP >> *Subject:* [CCAMP] WG Last Call Comments on "GMPLS Enhancement for >> Signal and Network Element Compatibility of Wavelength Switched >> Optical Networks" >> >> >> >> I have the following comments on the subject draft: >> >> >> >> 1. State the action to take if the new TLV and sub-TLVs or their >> attendant encodings are malformed. You should log the problem and >> ignore the entire LSA, subsuming TLV, or just the sub-TLV in GMPLS >> path computations. >> >> YOUNG>> In Section 5.2, added: >> >> >> >> "In case where the new sub-TLVs or their attendant encodings are >> >> malformed, the proper action would be to log the problem and ignore >> >> just the sub-TLVs in GMPLS path computations rather than ignoring >> >> the entire LSA." >> >> >> >> See inline. >> >> >> >> *YOUNG>> Which inline are you referring to? * >> >> >> >> >> >> 2. Section 2 - Your definition of "At most once" is semantically >> wrong. "At most once" means the TLV or sub-TLV can be include one time >> or not at all. It has nothing to with whether or not it should be >> specified. I hope we are not going to attempt to change the English >> language with this draft. >> >> YOUNG>> Corrected. Is a new text OK with you? >> >> >> >> "All sub-TLVs defined here may occur at most once in any given Optical >> Node TLV. If more than one copy of a sub-TLV is received, >> >> only the first one of the same type is accommodated and the rest >> are ignored upon receipt." >> >> >> >> Yes - although I'd replace "accommodated" with "processed". >> >> >> >> *YOUNG>> OK. Corrected. * >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 3. Section 3 - Figure 1 should not span multiple pages and the >> scale is off by one - it should be shifted right 1 column. >> >> YOUNG>> Done >> >> >> >> Ok. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 4. Section 6 - Explicitly state which are IANA registries are being >> extended. Since you are adding a new TLV, you will also need a new >> registry for the sub-TLVs. >> Seehttp://www.iana.org/assignments/ospf-traffic-eng-tlvs/ospf-traffic- >> eng-tlvs.xhtml#top-level for examples. >> >> >> >> YOUNG>> Done. Please check if the corrections are good. >> >> >> >> It would be easier for IANA if you explicitly state that you are >> creating two new registries. >> >> >> >> A new IANA registry will be created for sub-TLVs of the Optical >> Node Property TLV. The following sub-TLVs are allocated in this specification. >> >> >> >> o >> >> o >> >> o >> >> >> >> Additionally, a new IANA registry will be created for nested >> sub-TLVs of the Resource Block Information sub-TLV. The following >> sub-TLVs are allocated in this specification. >> >> >> >> o >> >> o >> >> o >> >> *YOUNG>> I reshuffled the order starting from the Optical Node >> Property TLV, and its sub-TLVs and nested-TLVs; then WSON-LSC >> Switching Type TLV and its sub-TLVs. * >> >> *Please see the enclosed working version. * >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Acee >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Editorial Comments: >> >> >> >> I would suggest the following corrections: >> >> >> >> >> >> 125c125 >> >> < to allow both multiple WSON signal types and common hybrid electro >> >> --- >> >>> to support both multiple WSON signal types and common hybrid >>> electro >> >> 197c197 >> >> < node. It is constructed of a set of sub-TLVs. There are no ordering >> >> --- >> >>> node. It is comprised of a set of sub-TLVs. There are no ordering >> >> 203c203 >> >> < encodings of these properties are defined in [WSON-Encode]. >> >> --- >> >>> encodings for these properties are defined in [WSON-Encode]. >> >> 253,254c253 >> >> < router, as described in [RFC3630] and [RFC5250]. Resource Block >> >> < Information >> >> --- >> >>> router, as described in [RFC3630] and [RFC5250]. >> >> 279,280c278,279 >> >> < The detail encodings of these sub-TLVs are found in [WSON-Encode] as >> >> < indicated in the table below. >> >> --- >> >>> The detailed encodings of these sub-TLVs are found in >>> [WSON-Encode] >> >>> as indicated in the table below. >> >> 293c292 >> >> < relation to the switching device. In particular it indicates the >> >> --- >> >>> relation to the switching device. In particular, it indicates the >> >> 302,303c301,302 >> >> < reach or leave all the resources. Resource Block Wavelength >> >> < Constraints sub-TLV describe these properties. >> >> --- >> >>> reach or leave all the resources. The Resource Block Wavelength >> >>> Constraints sub-TLV describes these properties. >> >> 316c315 >> >> < case then wavelength availability on these shared fibers is needed >> >> --- >> >>> case, then wavelength availability on these shared fibers is >>> needed >> >> 353c352 >> >> < Bandwidth TLV are defined (TBA by IANA): >> >> --- >> >>> Bandwidth sub-TLVs are defined (TBA by IANA): >> >> 402c401 >> >> < produce LSAs that exceed the IP Maximum Transmission Unit (MTU). In >> >> --- >> >>> produce LSAs that exceeds the IP Maximum Transmission Unit (MTU). >>> In >> >> 417,422c416,421 >> >> < is received for a system path cannot make use of the other four sub- >> >> < TLVs since it does not know the nature of the resources, e.g., are >> >> < the resources wavelength converters, regenerators, or something >> >> < else. Once this sub-TLV is received path computation can proceed >> >> < with whatever of the additional types of sub-TLVs it may have >> >> < received (there use is dependent upon the system type). If path >> >> --- >> >>> is received for a system, path compuation cannot make use of the >> >>> other four sub-TLVs since it does not know the nature of the >> >>> resources, e.g., are the resources wavelength converters, >> >>> regenerators, or something else. Once this sub-TLV is received, >> >>> path computation can proceed with whatever sub-TLVs it may have >> >>> received (their use is dependent upon the system type). If path >> >> 433c432 >> >> < these sub-TLVs then there is the possibility of either (a) path >> >> --- >> >>> these sub-TLVs, then there is the possibility of either (a) path >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Acee >> >> >> >> <draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-general-constraints-ospf-te-07.txt> >> >> >>
- [CCAMP] WG Last Call Comments on "GMPLS Enhanceme… Acee Lindem
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call Comments on "GMPLS Enhan… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call Comments on "GMPLS Enhan… Acee Lindem
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call Comments on "GMPLS Enhan… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call Comments on "GMPLS Enhan… Acee Lindem
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call Comments on "GMPLS Enhan… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call Comments on "GMPLS Enhan… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call Comments on "GMPLS Enhan… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call Comments on "GMPLS Enhan… Leeyoung