Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call Comments on "GMPLS Enhancement for Signal and Network Element Compatibility of Wavelength Switched Optical Networks"

Acee Lindem <acee.lindem@ericsson.com> Wed, 05 February 2014 22:10 UTC

Return-Path: <acee.lindem@ericsson.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 03B6A1A019C for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 14:10:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=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 jyOH1GxtBJtw for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 14:10:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from usevmg21.ericsson.net (usevmg21.ericsson.net [198.24.6.65]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E7401A00EC for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 14:10:46 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: c6180641-b7f2f8e000002cdc-0e-52f2b6e5e175
Received: from EUSAAHC005.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [147.117.188.87]) by usevmg21.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 3D.11.11484.5E6B2F25; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 23:10:46 +0100 (CET)
Received: from EUSAAMB101.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.118]) by EUSAAHC005.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.87]) with mapi id 14.02.0387.000; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 17:10:44 -0500
From: Acee Lindem <acee.lindem@ericsson.com>
To: Leeyoung Lee <leeyoung@huawei.com>
Thread-Topic: [CCAMP] WG Last Call Comments on "GMPLS Enhancement for Signal and Network Element Compatibility of Wavelength Switched Optical Networks"
Thread-Index: AQHPIT8UtGBskoe2T0S6s3vuwII7lpqnj4sA
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2014 22:10:44 +0000
Message-ID: <06D60676-4C54-4D18-AD96-F436E7C39DEC@ericsson.com>
References: <94A203EA12AECE4BA92D42DBFFE0AE47030B0E4A@eusaamb101.ericsson.se> <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E1729BB5F34@dfweml706-chm.china.huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E1729BB5F34@dfweml706-chm.china.huawei.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [147.117.188.9]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_06D606764C544D18AD96F436E7C39DECericssoncom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFvrGLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyuXRPuO6zbZ+CDP6u47N4MucGi8W0ea4O TB4tR96yeixZ8pMpgCmKyyYlNSezLLVI3y6BK+PC4rdMBQ8nMFUcX3uftYHxzDPGLkZODgkB E4nmkzdYIGwxiQv31rN1MXJxCAkcYZS42vaUCcJZxihx59xtsCo2AR2J54/+MYPYIgJqEt9f r2QCsZkFpCTu3upiBGkQFpjBKNE95zY7iCMiMJNRYsmfXlaIDiOJx5fbwCaxCKhInJx6ECzO K2AvcW3DGmaIdUANt7buBDuQUyBMYub3T2A2I9CB30+tgVonLnHryXwmiMMFJJbsOc8MYYtK vHz8jxXCVpTY1z+dHaI+WWJD3z42iGWCEidnPmGZwCg6C8moWUjKZiEpg4gbSLw/N58ZwtaW WLbwNZStL7Hxy1lGCNtaYvnGfYzIahYwcqxi5CgtTi3LTTcy3MQIjLtjEmyOOxgXfLI8xCjN waIkzvvlrXOQkEB6YklqdmpqQWpRfFFpTmrxIUYmDk6pBmDQCZzQmbb1XHehY4HBxxWGOZdY +jgvL/zNZ2vpe1a4oVv4Mb/Im3t5TQZn1wqWpj/fNidkUVXFc4X7sps13DxTjxoIPTCbM8O/ 5djMiZJrvynzXHbd0Cg3P3Kaj7H06+YrCbenN96ZL76wqOLANZb0mQ4y++zm/i2X0wnKfnlw 0audlokxvEosxRmJhlrMRcWJALxwPP+JAgAA
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: Wed, 05 Feb 2014 22:10:50 -0000

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.



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”.



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

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>