Re: [CCAMP] Switching Capability/Type for ospf-g709v3, signaling-g709v3

Daniele Ceccarelli <daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com> Tue, 08 January 2013 11:06 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 09E7021F8EE9 for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Jan 2013 03:06:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.248
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.248 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TvMAxKJya7qx for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Jan 2013 03:06:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailgw2.ericsson.se (mailgw2.ericsson.se [193.180.251.37]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EBF321F8EE7 for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Jan 2013 03:06:09 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb25-b7fb26d000006129-5e-50ebfda0130c
Received: from ESESSHC013.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.124]) by mailgw2.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 31.C8.24873.0ADFBE05; Tue, 8 Jan 2013 12:06:08 +0100 (CET)
Received: from ESESSMB301.ericsson.se ([169.254.1.193]) by ESESSHC013.ericsson.se ([153.88.183.57]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Tue, 8 Jan 2013 12:06:08 +0100
From: Daniele Ceccarelli <daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com>
To: "Gruman, Fred" <fred.gruman@us.fujitsu.com>, "ccamp@ietf.org" <ccamp@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Switching Capability/Type for ospf-g709v3, signaling-g709v3
Thread-Index: Ac3s82+y8vO2F259QmKlwmEkZgQsmgAnFmNA
Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2013 11:06:07 +0000
Message-ID: <4A1562797D64E44993C5CBF38CF1BE4805CD90@ESESSMB301.ericsson.se>
References: <5DF87403A81B0C43AF3EB1626511B2923C3031BF@RCHEXMBP2.fnc.net.local>
In-Reply-To: <5DF87403A81B0C43AF3EB1626511B2923C3031BF@RCHEXMBP2.fnc.net.local>
Accept-Language: it-IT, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [153.88.183.16]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_4A1562797D64E44993C5CBF38CF1BE4805CD90ESESSMB301ericsso_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFnrDLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+Jvje6Cv68DDLZvkrV4MucGi0V/62xW i77m86wOzB4tR96yeixZ8pPJY9qvNWwBzFFcNimpOZllqUX6dglcGduO7GAt2GVS8X/qJeYG xoe6XYycHBICJhIHbyxghLDFJC7cW8/WxcjFISRwiFHi8Nd+RghnMaPEwefPgRwODjYBK4kn h3xAGkQEQiR2XL3CBGIzC6hLLNv6kxWkRFjAQ2JFuwdEiafE3ktr2EHCIgJGEp/XO4KEWQRU JPavuMECYvMKeEtsXnOHFcQWEvCTeNy3Hmwip4C/xK6vt9lAbEYBWYkJuxcxQmwSl7j1ZD4T xMkCEkv2nGeGsEUlXj7+xwphK0rsPNvODFGfL3Fhy3pWiF2CEidnPmGZwCg6C8moWUjKZiEp g4jrSdyYOoUNwtaWWLbwNTOErSsx498hFmTxBYzsqxjZcxMzc9LLjTYxAmPs4JbfqjsY75wT OcQozcGiJM4b7nohQEggPbEkNTs1tSC1KL6oNCe1+BAjEwenVAOj1ydJ4erHrJeOPfUvdnN4 NGv6vcdy95b0XmhxWVe5TJ/fSz67aO6vtX6mvGzuSv5nLp/j/BR9Z1bpmqlzNz+TmeReJ2Zm bdp4zyvM4MkEPevlf1mvZXs/3NL4aZLu4o5L+7/rf7g+KfjKbLYp3vIMTaUb9deEfs1c0jlN +rT+BFlhV9H/TCt/KrEUZyQaajEXFScCANh3Tip/AgAA
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] Switching Capability/Type for ospf-g709v3, signaling-g709v3
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: Tue, 08 Jan 2013 11:06:12 -0000

Hi Fred,

during the last call it was suggested to change the switching capability from 101 to 110. The comment was raised just against OSPF, but i think it was just an oversight.

If Fatai and the other co-authors agree i would suggest aligning also RSVP to 110 (either explicitely or with a reference to OSPF)

Many thanks
Daniele



________________________________
From: Gruman, Fred [mailto:fred.gruman@us.fujitsu.com]
Sent: lunedì 7 gennaio 2013 17.24
To: ccamp@ietf.org
Cc: Fatai Zhang; Daniele Ceccarelli
Subject: Switching Capability/Type for ospf-g709v3, signaling-g709v3

Hi Fatai, Daniele,

I noticed that in the latest routing draft of ospf-g709v3-04 that the switching capability was changed from 101 to 110.  The latest signaling draft signaling-g709v3-05 still lists 101 as the switching type (in section 4) although it does defer to [OTN-OSPF].  I assume that the switching capability/type is to be consistent between routing and signaling and that the new recommendation is 110.  Is this correct?

If so, I would recommend removing the "(101, TBA by IANA)" from the signaling draft and rely on the reference to [OTN-OSPF].

Thanks,
Fred