[CCAMP] 答复: WG Last Call on draft-ietf-ccamp-flexible-grid-ospf-ext-04

Zhenghaomian <zhenghaomian@huawei.com> Fri, 01 July 2016 07:04 UTC

Return-Path: <zhenghaomian@huawei.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 E629C12D106 for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Jul 2016 00:04:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.636
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.636 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 FtrSYQuUMi_I for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Jul 2016 00:03:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E10512D0E6 for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Jul 2016 00:03:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml706-cah.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id CMZ15571; Fri, 01 Jul 2016 07:03:55 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from SZXEMA419-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.72.37) by lhreml706-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.182) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.235.1; Fri, 1 Jul 2016 08:03:46 +0100
Received: from SZXEMA504-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.7.189]) by SZXEMA419-HUB.china.huawei.com ([10.82.72.37]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Fri, 1 Jul 2016 15:03:35 +0800
From: Zhenghaomian <zhenghaomian@huawei.com>
To: Dieter Beller <Dieter.Beller@nokia.com>, Fatai Zhang <zhangfatai@huawei.com>, "CCAMP (ccamp@ietf.org)" <ccamp@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [CCAMP] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-ccamp-flexible-grid-ospf-ext-04
Thread-Index: AQHR0qyhLbGIhfadrUivStKSAKlz76ADGpZQ
Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2016 07:03:34 +0000
Message-ID: <E0C26CAA2504C84093A49B2CAC3261A438D3EF8E@SZXEMA504-MBX.china.huawei.com>
References: <F82A4B6D50F9464B8EBA55651F541CF85CDBA104@SZXEMA504-MBS.china.huawei.com> <be6989bb-6327-9795-8501-f6ba1340e90a@nokia.com>
In-Reply-To: <be6989bb-6327-9795-8501-f6ba1340e90a@nokia.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.57.78.114]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_E0C26CAA2504C84093A49B2CAC3261A438D3EF8ESZXEMA504MBXchi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A020203.577615DC.013C, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=169.254.7.189, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: 8d50d6d0aec7775dcf83ab6c415f0d29
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/ZL__HSIN9AJZ0SxUcyFgPfTltFY>
Subject: [CCAMP] 答复: WG Last Call on draft-ietf-ccamp-flexible-grid-ospf-ext-04
X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Fri, 01 Jul 2016 07:04:03 -0000

Hi, Dieter,

Thanks for your comments, please see my reply inline:



发件人: CCAMP [mailto:ccamp-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 Dieter Beller
发送时间: 2016年6月30日 16:50
收件人: Fatai Zhang; CCAMP (ccamp@ietf.org)
主题: Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-ccamp-flexible-grid-ospf-ext-04

Hi Fatai, CCAMPers,

I've reviewed this document and I have the following comment:

Section 4.1:

4.1. ISCD Extensions for Flexi-grid



         Value                       Type



         -----                       ----



      152 (TBA by IANA)           Flexi-Grid-LSC capable



   Switching Capability and Encoding values MUST be used as follows:



              Switching Capability = Flexi-Grid-LSC



              Encoding Type = lambda [as defined in RFC3471<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3471>]



   When Switching Capability and Encoding fields are set to values as

   stated above, the Interface Switching Capability Descriptor MUST be

   interpreted as in [RFC4203<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4203>] with the optional inclusion of one or

   more Switching Capability Specific Information sub-TLVs.

draft-ietf-ccamp-flexible-grid-ospf-ext-04 defines the Switching Capability Specific Information sub-TLVs, but the ISCD as defined
in RFC4203 contains "Max LSP Bandwidth at priority x" fields in the  generic ISCD part and these fields do IMHO not make
sense for flex grid (see below). The draft does not say how these fields shall be filled.
[Haomian] I agree with what you said, the ‘Max LSP Bandwidth at priority x’ don’t make sense for flexi-grid, so we need to skip this in ISCD section. You are right we need to specify how to fill in even if we skip this section. How about we add the following statement in the end of section 4.1?
Given the Switching Capability set to Flexi-Grid-LSC, the ‘Max LSP Bandwidth at priority x (x from 0 to 7)’ defined in [RFC4203] MUST be fulfilled with 0 and ignored.
Do you think it’s clear enough?

Excerpt from RFC4203:

1.4.  Interface Switching Capability Descriptor



   The Interface Switching Capability Descriptor is a sub-TLV (of type

   15) of the Link TLV.  The length is the length of value field in

   octets.  The format of the value field is as shown below:



    0                   1                   2                   3

    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   | Switching Cap |   Encoding    |           Reserved            |

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 0              |

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 1              |

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 2              |

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 3              |

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 4              |

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 5              |

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 6              |

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 7              |

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   |        Switching Capability-specific information              |

   |                  (variable)                                   |

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+



   The Switching Capability (Switching Cap) field contains one of the

   following values:



      1     Packet-Switch Capable-1 (PSC-1)

      2     Packet-Switch Capable-2 (PSC-2)

      3     Packet-Switch Capable-3 (PSC-3)

      4     Packet-Switch Capable-4 (PSC-4)

      51    Layer-2 Switch Capable  (L2SC)

      100   Time-Division-Multiplex Capable (TDM)

      150   Lambda-Switch Capable   (LSC)

      200   Fiber-Switch Capable    (FSC)



   The Encoding field contains one of the values specified in Section<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4203#section-3.1.1>

   3.1.1<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4203#section-3.1.1> of [GMPLS-SIG<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4203#ref-GMPLS-SIG>].



   Maximum LSP Bandwidth is encoded as a list of eight 4 octet fields in

   the IEEE floating point format [IEEE<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4203#ref-IEEE>], with priority 0 first and

   priority 7 last.  The units are bytes (not bits!) per second.



   The content of the Switching Capability specific information field

   depends on the value of the Switching Capability field.


Minor nits:

page 5 typo:
'Chanel Spacing' instead of 'Channel Spacing'
[Haomian] Thanks, will update in the next version.


page 7 editorial:
'Flexi-Grid-LSC capable': capable should be removed (already included in the LSC abbreviation).

[Haomian] Thanks, will use ‘Flexi-Grid-LSC’ instead of ‘Flexi-Grid-LSC capable’, the replacement will also be applied in other a few places in the draft.

Thanks,
Dieter

On 25.06.2016 04:35, Fatai Zhang wrote:
Hi all,

This starts a two week working group last call on [draft-ietf-ccamp-flexible-grid-ospf-ext-04].

The working group last call ends on Friday, July 8th. Please send your comments to the CCAMP mailing list.

As is always the case, positive comments, e.g., "I've reviewed this document and believe it is ready for publication", are welcome. This is useful and important, even from authors.

Since the WG chairs and secretary are co-authors/co-contributor of this draft, if anyone is willing to be the shepherd of the document, please volunteer.

Note that no IPR was disclosed against this document.



Thanks

Fatai and Daniele





_______________________________________________

CCAMP mailing list

CCAMP@ietf.org<mailto:CCAMP@ietf.org>

https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp

--

Dieter Beller
ASON/GMPLS Project Manager
IP/Optical Networks, Optics, Nokia

t: +49 711 821 43125 | m : +49 175 7266874 | OnNet: 259 43125
Dieter.Beller@nokia.com<mailto:Dieter.Beller@nokia.com>
Alcatel-Lucent Deutschland AG | Lorenzstr. 10 | 70435 Stuttgart
Sitz der Gesellschaft | Domicile of the Company: Stuttgart · Amtsgericht Stuttgart HRB 4026
Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrates | Chairman of the Supervisory Board: Prof. J. Menno Harms
Vorstand | Board of Management: Wilhelm Dresselhaus (Vorsitzender | Chairman) · Hans-Jörg Daub · Ralf Niederberger

This e-mail and its attachments, if any, may contain confidential information.
If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us and delete or destroy the e-mail and its attachments, if any, immediately.
If you have received this e-mail in error, you must not forward or make use of the e-mail and its attachments, if any.