RE: Label type to be used
"Pandian, Vijay" <Vijay.Pandian@sycamorenet.com> Mon, 22 March 2004 17:03 UTC
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA06243 for <ccamp-archive@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Mar 2004 12:03:29 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1B5Spm-00055X-00 for ccamp-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 22 Mar 2004 12:03:31 -0500
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1B5Son-0004w0-00 for ccamp-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 22 Mar 2004 12:02:30 -0500
Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62] ident=mailnull) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1B5Snr-0004n9-00 for ccamp-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 22 Mar 2004 12:01:31 -0500
Received: from lserv by psg.com with local (Exim 4.30; FreeBSD) id 1B5SNg-0004PV-6l for ccamp-data@psg.com; Mon, 22 Mar 2004 16:34:28 +0000
Received: from [12.146.0.143] (helo=cabo.sycamorenet.com) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.30; FreeBSD) id 1B5SNZ-0004OU-2G for ccamp@ops.ietf.org; Mon, 22 Mar 2004 16:34:21 +0000
Received: by cabo.sycamorenet.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <H2A6THPZ>; Mon, 22 Mar 2004 11:37:38 -0500
Message-ID: <5533E74FC0108E41A8217C0899CA56CF081CB5@mach5.sycamorenet.com>
From: "Pandian, Vijay" <Vijay.Pandian@sycamorenet.com>
To: 'Kireeti Kompella' <kireeti@juniper.net>, ccamp@ops.ietf.org
Subject: RE: Label type to be used
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2004 11:37:36 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Sender: owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60
Kireeti, Comments inline... Regards, Vijay > -----Original Message----- > From: Kireeti Kompella [mailto:kireeti@juniper.net] > Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2004 12:58 PM > To: ccamp@ops.ietf.org > Subject: Label type to be used > > > Hi, > > Arthi and Lou pointed out the following typos in the GMPLS routing doc > (draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-routing-09.txt) which is now in the RFC > Editor's queue: > > In section 2.4.7 is the following table defining the type of label > for various combinations of switching types: > > [PSC, PSC] - label is carried in the "shim" header [RFC3032] > [TDM, TDM] - label represents a TDM time slot [GMPLS-SONET-SDH] > [LSC, LSC] - label represents a lambda > [FSC, FSC] - label represents a port on an OXC > [PSC, TDM] - label represents a TDM time slot [GMPLS-SONET-SDH] > [PSC, LSC] - label represents a lambda > [PSC, FSC] - label represents a port > [TDM, LSC] - label represents a lambda > [TDM, FSC] - label represents a port > [LSC, FSC] - label represents a port > > The one at issue is [PSC, LSC]; above it says that the label > represents a lambda; and in the case of [PSC, TDM] with a fully > transparent signal, the above indicates the label represents a TDM > time slot. The proposal is to change this to: > > [PSC, PSC] - label is carried in the "shim" header [RFC3032] > [TDM, TDM] - label represents a TDM time slot [GMPLS-SONET-SDH] > [LSC, LSC] - label represents a lambda > [FSC, FSC] - label represents a port on an OXC > [PSC, TDM] - fully transparent signal: label represents a port > ("transparency" is defined in [GMPLS-SONET-SDH]) > [PSC, TDM] - non-transparent signal: label represents a TDM time > slot [GMPLS-SONET-SDH] > [PSC, LSC] - label represents a port > [PSC, FSC] - label represents a port > [TDM, LSC] - label represents a lambda > [TDM, FSC] - label represents a port > [LSC, FSC] - label represents a port > > Please respond by Friday 3/26, 5pm PST with comments on: > > a) do you agree with the above change? Yes, but we need one more change. Why is it for [TDM, LSC] the label is lambda? Shouldn't this be port as well? > b) in your implementation today, what do expect the label to represent > i) in the case of [PSC, LSC]? Not applicable > ii) in the case of [PSC, TDM] with a fully transparent signal? Port > c) if you implement as the draft says, would it be a hardship > to change > this? No > > If we can get closure on this, I'll take up the task of modifying the > pending RFC with the ADs. > > Kireeti. > ------- >
- Label type to be used Kireeti Kompella
- Re: Label type to be used Anca Zamfir
- Re: Label type to be used Dimitri.Papadimitriou
- Re: Label type to be used Dimitri.Papadimitriou
- Re: Label type to be used Kireeti Kompella
- Re: Label type to be used Anca Zamfir
- Re: Label type to be used Ashok Narayanan
- Re: Label type to be used Lou Berger
- Re: Label type to be used Ashok Narayanan
- Re: Label type to be used Ashok Narayanan
- Re: Label type to be used dimitri papadimitriou
- Re: Label type to be used Kireeti Kompella
- Re: Label type to be used dimitri papadimitriou
- Re: Label type to be used Kireeti Kompella
- Re: Label type to be used Lou Berger
- RE: Label type to be used Pandian, Vijay
- RE: Label type to be used John Drake
- Re: Label type to be used Ben Mack-Crane
- RE: Label type to be used John Drake
- Re: Label type to be used Kireeti Kompella
- Re: Label type to be used Arthi Ayyangar
- Re: Label type to be used Ben Mack-Crane
- Re: Label type to be used Ashok Narayanan
- RE: Label type to be used John Drake
- RE: Label type to be used Lou Berger
- RE: Label type to be used Ong, Lyndon
- Re: Label type to be used Dimitri.Papadimitriou
- RE: Label type to be used Ong, Lyndon
- Re: Label type to be used Dimitri.Papadimitriou
- RE: Label type to be used Pandian, Vijay
- Re: Label type to be used Dimitri.Papadimitriou