Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-wson-encode
Huub van Helvoort <huubatwork@gmail.com> Thu, 29 January 2015 13:49 UTC
Return-Path: <huubatwork@gmail.com>
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 A861D1A0636 for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 05:49:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, 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 D1e3SS9P7hGR for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 05:49:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wi0-x22d.google.com (mail-wi0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::22d]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8BAC31A038A for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 05:49:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wi0-f173.google.com with SMTP id r20so26566438wiv.0 for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 05:49:14 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:disposition-notification-to:date:from:reply-to :user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=s74ZDgkzKWuMB6PdLYjbHLF0ux9w9F4ireM4r0WmWDk=; b=nXBQLUVv0haHnjqff6ey5lENzlnJS+lV+ebOe8HCkwLO+vgkjjYz+YAIWWKuWuAUjv rQqGmhzd00/JFi64oY/R3jm1iBpzovJIKihzabXZnrjFLhhkPJvOGOxryfPRzjH3He6R B8I712i57Bt1f03WmfyNDOElfWBJqvvTIpI3Y9Mbi6rt5/mfM5V1/RHPsc/LXhPoNh0c KEmRf6QRRJkn/ITHCmJ1Oi7XgyC1UDIAVh6a9WdLsTwzAhbG3veEs5hZbQXf3rDMakp7 FCS2B1PmmiVT1bWiiTsg5CHVId7GQgEWy0srFIOJ7YUskYfGa3NeBuh0huLmSAClofqh iXuQ==
X-Received: by 10.180.218.73 with SMTP id pe9mr192839wic.13.1422539354316; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 05:49:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from McObelix.local (g215085.upc-g.chello.nl. [80.57.215.85]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id fi10sm2558126wib.13.2015.01.29.05.49.13 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 29 Jan 2015 05:49:13 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <54CA3A58.1080309@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 14:49:12 +0100
From: Huub van Helvoort <huubatwork@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: adrian@olddog.co.uk, 'Leeyoung' <leeyoung@huawei.com>
References: <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E1729C7F0A9@dfweml706-chm> <6D32668528F93D449A073F45707153D82C533567@US70UWXCHMBA03.zam.alcatel-lucent.com> <086901d03b3a$c7386c10$55a94430$@olddog.co.uk> <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E1729C7F161@dfweml706-chm> <00ff01d03bc6$d84bbcf0$88e336d0$@olddog.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <00ff01d03bc6$d84bbcf0$88e336d0$@olddog.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/T2byJidlbi_jJahW6ZHlHXi7nUo>
Cc: ccamp@ietf.org, ccamp-chairs@tools.ietf.org, draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-wson-encode.all@tools.ietf.org
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-wson-encode
X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: huubatwork@gmail.com
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: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 13:49:21 -0000
All, I agree with Adrians assessment. +1 for option 2. Regards, Huub. ======== On 29-01-15 14:23, Adrian Farrel wrote: > Hi again, > >> There is always a priori knowledge in optical network domain as to who >> are you interfacing with. So you know which vendor you are interfacing. >> If you do not know, then you are in trouble. > > Hmmm. It is exactly type of trouble we are trying to detect and protect against. > > I refute your statement of a priori knowledge. I think there is a priori intention, but not knowledge. Unless you have very good eyesight or someone at the other end of the fiber when you give it a tug, you don't know. And even then. Fibering errors happen from time to time. Consider, in particular a patch panel. > >> Now, what is the purpose of standard FECs and modulations in the AI? Given >> several choices each vendor may support in its device, the path computation >> would find a matched types for FEC and modulation for a given optical path. >> This is what is intended when optical signal processing constraints were >> proposed as part of path computation constraints in optical networks. > > > The case you are making here is for no standard control plane! > What is the point of standardising if there is never any interworking? > But actually, we know about interworking at the physical layer, and (more important) we know about a single, end-to-end control plane that spans multiple vendor devices. It all exists. > > Of course, we can fall back into the old-style vendor islands, and many like to do so. But it is not a compulsory deployment model. > >> There is very little chance for vendor specific FECs and Modulations will match >> even if they are identified with the OUI code. > > You have it the wrong way round! > The OUI is largely to protect against expectations of interworking when none can exist. > It might (much less frequently) be used to describe the way that vendorA and vendorB pick FECs and modulations in order to achieve interworking. > > Adrian > > _______________________________________________ > CCAMP mailing list > CCAMP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp > -- ***************************************************************** 请记住,你是独一无二的,就像其他每一个人一样
- [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in draft… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in d… Lam, Hing-Kam (Kam)
- Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in d… Gert Grammel
- Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in d… Lam, Hing-Kam (Kam)
- Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in d… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in d… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in d… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in d… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in d… Lam, Hing-Kam (Kam)
- Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in d… BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A
- Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in d… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in d… BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A
- Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in d… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in d… Varma, Eve L (Eve)
- Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in d… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in d… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in d… Doolan, Paul (Coriant - US/Irving)
- Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in d… Fatai Zhang
- Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in d… Dieter Beller
- Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in d… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in d… Huub van Helvoort
- Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in d… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in d… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in d… Gert Grammel
- Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in d… Gabriele Maria Galimberti (ggalimbe)
- Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in d… Zhangxian (Xian)
- Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in d… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in d… Daniele Ceccarelli
- Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in d… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in d… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in d… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in d… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in d… Daniele Ceccarelli
- Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in d… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] Vendor-Specific Application Code in d… Adrian Farrel