Re: [CCAMP] I-D Action: draft-zhang-ccamp-mpls-tp-rsvpte-ext-tunnel-num-04.txt

zhang.fei3@zte.com.cn Thu, 11 October 2012 00:28 UTC

Return-Path: <zhang.fei3@zte.com.cn>
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 53DFD11E80D2 for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Oct 2012 17:28:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -97.767
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-97.767 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.628, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_BASE64_TEXT=1.753, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 ygPmOGHjzcxT for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Oct 2012 17:28:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zte.com.cn (mx5.zte.com.cn [63.217.80.70]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E53911E808D for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Oct 2012 17:28:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zte.com.cn (unknown [192.168.168.119]) by Websense Email Security Gateway with ESMTP id 767DB12636E7 for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Thu, 11 Oct 2012 08:29:01 +0800 (CST)
Received: from mse01.zte.com.cn (unknown [10.30.3.20]) by Websense Email Security Gateway with ESMTPS id BAE2A4AF9C9; Thu, 11 Oct 2012 08:25:11 +0800 (CST)
Received: from notes_smtp.zte.com.cn ([10.30.1.239]) by mse01.zte.com.cn with ESMTP id q9B0SHQ5000444; Thu, 11 Oct 2012 08:28:17 +0800 (GMT-8) (envelope-from zhang.fei3@zte.com.cn)
In-Reply-To: <5075555F.7000803@labn.net>
To: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-KeepSent: 2493A2DF:4B0D3FBA-48257A94:00024E58; type=4; name=$KeepSent
X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.5.6 March 06, 2007
Message-ID: <OF2493A2DF.4B0D3FBA-ON48257A94.00024E58-48257A94.00029575@zte.com.cn>
From: zhang.fei3@zte.com.cn
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 08:28:11 +0800
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on notes_smtp/zte_ltd(Release 8.5.3FP1 HF212|May 23, 2012) at 2012-10-11 08:28:11, Serialize complete at 2012-10-11 08:28:11
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_alternative 0002957448257A94_="
X-MAIL: mse01.zte.com.cn q9B0SHQ5000444
Cc: "ccamp@ietf.org" <ccamp@ietf.org>, venkat.mahalingams@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] I-D Action: draft-zhang-ccamp-mpls-tp-rsvpte-ext-tunnel-num-04.txt
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: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 00:28:25 -0000

Hi Lou

Thanks for the clarification, v-05 is uploaded with the filename unchanged



A new version of I-D, 
draft-zhang-ccamp-mpls-tp-rsvpte-ext-tunnel-num-05.txt
has been successfully submitted by Fei Zhang and posted to the
IETF repository.

Filename:                 draft-zhang-ccamp-mpls-tp-rsvpte-ext-tunnel-num
Revision:                 05
Title:                            RSVP-TE Identification of MPLS-TP 
Co-Routed Bidirectional LSP
Creation date:            2012-10-12
WG ID:                            ccamp
Number of pages: 8
URL:             
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-zhang-ccamp-mpls-tp-rsvpte-ext-tunnel-num-05.txt

Status:          
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zhang-ccamp-mpls-tp-rsvpte-ext-tunnel-num

Htmlized:        
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zhang-ccamp-mpls-tp-rsvpte-ext-tunnel-num-05

Diff:            
http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-zhang-ccamp-mpls-tp-rsvpte-ext-tunnel-num-05


Abstract:
   The MPLS Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) identifiers document [RFC6370]
   specifies an initial set of identifiers, including the local assigned
   Z9-Tunnel_Num for co-routed bidirectional LSP, which is not covered
   by the current specifications, like [RFC3209], [RFC3473].  This
   document defines Resource ReserVation Protocol Traffic Engnieering
   (RSVP-TE) identification of MPLS-TP co-routed bidirectional LSP.

Thanks

Fei
 



Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> 
2012-10-10 19:00

收件人
zhang.fei3@zte.com.cn
抄送
bao.xiao1@zte.com.cn, "BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A (ATTLABS)" <db3546@att.com>om>, 
"Rakesh Gandhi (rgandhi)" <rgandhi@cisco.com>om>, 
venkat.mahalingams@gmail.com, xuyunbin@mail.ritt.com.cn, "ccamp@ietf.org" 
<ccamp@ietf.org>
主题
Re: [CCAMP] I-D Action: 
draft-zhang-ccamp-mpls-tp-rsvpte-ext-tunnel-num-04.txt






fyi - changing the title in the text doesn't require a change in the
filename, and such a change just confuses things/people...

On 10/10/2012 2:57 AM, zhang.fei3@zte.com.cn wrote:
> 
> Hi Lou
> 
> We have finished the editing according to your suggestion, please help
> review the draft to see whether another roll of revision is needed.
> 
> 
> A new version of I-D, draft-zvxg-ccamp-mpls-tp-rsvpte-id-00.txt
> has been successfully submitted by Fei Zhang and posted to the
> IETF repository.
> 
> Filename:                  draft-zvxg-ccamp-mpls-tp-rsvpte-id
> Revision:                  00
> Title:                                   RSVP-TE Identification of
> MPLS-TP Co-Routed Bidirectional LSP
> Creation date:                  2012-10-12
> WG ID:                                   Individual Submission
> Number of pages: 8
> URL: 
> 
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-zvxg-ccamp-mpls-tp-rsvpte-id-00.txt

> Status: 
>  http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zvxg-ccamp-mpls-tp-rsvpte-id
> Htmlized: 
>  http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zvxg-ccamp-mpls-tp-rsvpte-id-00
> 
> 
> Abstract:
>   The MPLS Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) identifiers document [RFC6370]
>   specifies an initial set of identifiers, including the local assigned
>   Z9-Tunnel_Num for co-routed bidirectional LSP, which is not covered
>   by the current specifications, like [RFC3209], [RFC3473].  This
>   document defines Resource ReserVation Protocol Traffic Engnieering
>   (RSVP-TE) identification of MPLS-TP co-routed bidirectional LSP.
> 
> 
> Thanks and best regards 
> 
> ;)
> 
> The authors
> 
> 
> *Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>*
> 
> 2012-10-09 02:11
> 
> 
> 收件人
>                zhang.fei3@zte.com.cn, "Rakesh Gandhi (rgandhi)" 
<rgandhi@cisco.com>om>,
> venkat.mahalingams@gmail.com, xuyunbin@mail.ritt.com.cn,
> bao.xiao1@zte.com.cn, "BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A (ATTLABS)" <db3546@att.com>
> 抄送
> 
> 主题
>                Re: [CCAMP] I-D Action:
> draft-zhang-ccamp-mpls-tp-rsvpte-ext-tunnel-num-04.txt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fei, Authors,
>                 I think you have the document scoped to match the
> discussion.  I'm
> personally still having a hard time with parsing the document.  I think
> I know what you mean to say, it's just that the document isn't always so
> clear.  I think some editing might help.
> 
> Hhere are some suggestions:
> 1) Change the title to something like:
> RSVP-TE Identification of MPLS-TP Co-Routed Bidirectional LSPs
> 
> 2) Simplify the Abstract, perhaps just focus on the purpose of the
> extension vs the details of the extension.
> 
> 3) Ensure the Intro covers the key points clearly.  I see the minimal
> set of key points as:
>   - TP identifiers are defined in RFC6370
>   - Identifiers are need by both end points of a bidirectional LSP
>     for OAM
>   - RFC6370 defines mapping of TP identifiers to RSVP-TE for
>     associated bidirectional LSPs (but other aspects aren't which
>     are covered by [associated-lsp]), but not co-routed LSPs.
>   - The high level approach taken by the draft to address the
>     missing function.
> 
> 4) The Operation section seems to be covering procedures, so why not
> just combine with section 4.2, or add an informational description of
> the extension as part of section 4 (before section 4.1).
> 
> 5) The Procedures section needs to explicitly define what an
> implementation needs to do to (a) support the desired function and (b)
> conform with the document.  Think about covering what the
> ingress/transit/egress needs to do and how it needs to do it.
> 
> Lou
> 
> PS please feel free to respond on-list (including the above) if you'd 
like.
> 
> On 8/28/2012 12:33 PM, zhang.fei3@zte.com.cn wrote:
>>
>> Lou
>>
>> We have received comments offline/online and addressed them into the
>> draft v-03 from the polling version 02, then updated the draft to v-04
>> according to the comments received since IETF84 meeting and pushed the
>> proposal into the mailinglist also to hear more opinions.
>>
>> The authors think we have addressed all the comments and this draft is
>> ready for WG consideration now.
>>
>> Any suggestion?
>>
>> Best regards :)
>>
>> Fei
>>
>>
>> *Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>*
>>
>> 2012-08-21 01:38
>>
>> 
>> 收件人
>>                  zhang.fei3@zte.com.cn
>> 抄送
>>                  ccamp@ietf.org
>> 主题
>>                  Re: [CCAMP] I-D Action:
>> draft-zhang-ccamp-mpls-tp-rsvpte-ext-tunnel-num-04.txt
>>
>>
>> 
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Fei,
>>                 To respond to your procedure point:
>>
>> On 8/17/2012 3:27 AM, zhang.fei3@zte.com.cn wrote:
>>> I am not sure whether this draft should follow the the procedures
>>> defined for WG documents or not.
>>
>> Individual drafts are completely under the control of the authors.  Of
>> course, they may choose to listen to feedback of WG participants in 
hope
>> of getting their draft accepted as a WG draft....
>>
>> Lou
>>
>>
>