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

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:lberger@labn.net]
>> Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 1:33 PM
>> To: John E Drake
>> Cc: Fatai Zhang; draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-g709-info-model@tools.ietf.org;
>> CCAMP; draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3@tools.ietf.org
>> 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: ccamp-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ccamp-bounces@ietf.org] On
>>>> Behalf Of Lou Berger
>>>> Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 9:17 AM
>>>> To: Fatai Zhang
>>>> Cc: draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-g709-info-model@tools.ietf.org; CCAMP;
>>>> draft- ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3@tools.ietf.org
>>>> 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
>>>> CCAMP@ietf.org
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>