Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode

Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> Tue, 28 January 2014 22:35 UTC

Return-Path: <lberger@labn.net>
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 9A3CC1A044C for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Jan 2014 14:35:32 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, 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 FYfanZP_PAXm for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Jan 2014 14:35:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from oproxy19-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com (oproxy19-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com [70.40.200.33]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 7301C1A03A6 for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Jan 2014 14:35:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 15759 invoked by uid 0); 28 Jan 2014 22:35:27 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO box313.bluehost.com) (69.89.31.113) by oproxy19.mail.unifiedlayer.com with SMTP; 28 Jan 2014 22:35:27 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=labn.net; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:To:MIME-Version:From:Date:Message-ID; bh=hrWNeuNCH9874YwL2w5U6BZlyZd/tzs+/m8idrw3Bu4=; b=QYGHlbj/M+DSn6IMjMwyFUszC/4Rqe08H2cEeOX0ekETtZ3rMFFVVosSDpicLSUEaGU5RcAkKzMe0CTlrrftuSuYzT5iF9R4JdVF5OG7R3iQclooIhX03PvnAeRKvNEP;
Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113]:54751 helo=[127.0.0.1]) by box313.bluehost.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <lberger@labn.net>) id 1W8HFf-0000e3-Mj; Tue, 28 Jan 2014 15:35:27 -0700
Message-ID: <52E830AA.3060503@labn.net>
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 17:35:22 -0500
From: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Leeyoung <leeyoung@huawei.com>, CCAMP <ccamp@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode@tools.ietf.org>
References: <524AF9A9.3040006@labn.net> <5266E138.8080605@labn.net> <526FFDF8.1060101@labn.net> <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E17291E3DF3@dfweml511-mbs.china.huawei.com> <52DD7EA6.2030200@labn.net> <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E1729BB456E@dfweml706-chm.china.huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E1729BB456E@dfweml706-chm.china.huawei.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Identified-User: {1038:box313.bluehost.com:labnmobi:labn.net} {sentby:smtp auth 69.89.31.113 authed with lberger@labn.net}
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode
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: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 22:35:32 -0000

Young,


On 1/27/2014 8:04 PM, Leeyoung wrote:
> Hi Lou,
> 
> All missing references are added. 
> 
> Yes, the "second 32 bit field is referring to "Additional fields as necessary per action" field shown on page 14."
> 
> Old: The second 32 bit field is a part of the base label used as a starting point in many of the specific formats.
> New: The second 32 bit field (which is referred to by "Additional fields as necessary per action" in the below encoding) is a part of the base label used in many of the specific formats.

Well, this still isn't clear as the packet diagram doesn't show a 32 bit
field, it shows a variable length one.  How about:
OLD
  The second 32 bit field (which is referred to by "Additional fields
   as necessary per action" in the below encoding) is a part of the
   base label used in many of the specific formats.
 and
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |      Additional fields as necessary per action                |
     |                                                               |

NEW
   Action specific fields are defined below.
 and
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                   (Action specific fields)                    |
     |                            ....                               |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


Also, just noticed:
2.2.3. LABEL_RANGE1

What does the 1 indicate in the name?

Much thanks,
Lou

> 
> Attached is a working version of draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode-14.txt. 
> 
> Let me know if this is ready to publish.
> 
> Regards,
> Young
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lou Berger [mailto:lberger@labn.net] 
> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2014 1:53 PM
> To: Leeyoung; CCAMP; draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode@tools.ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode
> 
> Young, (all),
> 
> You have two idnit issues:
>   == Missing Reference: 'RWA-INFO' is mentioned on line 198, but not defined
>   == Missing Reference: 'RFC 6205' is mentioned on line 779, but not defined
> 
> I have just one question on this one:
> 
>> - section 2.2.
>>    Labels are variable in lengh and need not be 4 bytes long.  This
>>    needs to be represented and accounted for in the encodings defined
>>    in this section.
>>
>> YOUNG>> Agreed. Added the following sentence in Section 2.6 (new section due to shuffling):
>>    "Labels are variable in length. The second 32 bit field is a part of the base label used as a
>>    starting point in many of the specific formats."
>>
> 
> I don't understand what you mean by the "second 32 bit field" are you referring to the " Additional fields as necessary per action" field shown on page 14?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Lou
>