Response to your communication on Ethernet Traffic Parameters
"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Sun, 15 October 2006 22:34 UTC
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GZEZI-0007O5-LO for ccamp-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 15 Oct 2006 18:34:52 -0400
Received: from psg.com ([147.28.0.62]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GZEM9-0002TG-3w for ccamp-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 15 Oct 2006 18:21:18 -0400
Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.63 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org>) id 1GZEHW-0002MT-WD for ccamp-data@psg.com; Sun, 15 Oct 2006 22:16:31 +0000
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.5 (2006-08-29) on psg.com
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_RCVD_HELO autolearn=ham version=3.1.5
Received: from [80.68.34.48] (helo=mail1.noc.data.net.uk) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.63 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <adrian@olddog.co.uk>) id 1GZEHV-0002LZ-GG for ccamp@ops.ietf.org; Sun, 15 Oct 2006 22:16:30 +0000
Received: from 57-99.dsl.data.net.uk ([80.68.57.99] helo=cortex.aria-networks.com) by mail1.noc.data.net.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #2) id 1GZEHs-00059T-00 for ccamp@ops.ietf.org; Sun, 15 Oct 2006 23:16:52 +0100
Received: from your029b8cecfe ([64.47.156.25] RDNS failed) by cortex.aria-networks.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Sun, 15 Oct 2006 23:16:27 +0100
Message-ID: <2d4d01c6f0a7$8c6ac510$0a23fea9@your029b8cecfe>
Reply-To: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
From: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: Jim Jones <Jim.D.Jones@alcatel.com>
Cc: ccamp@ops.ietf.org, "Brungard, Deborah A, ALABS" <dbrungard@att.com>, Bill Fenner <fenner@research.att.com>, Ross Callon <rcallon@juniper.net>
Subject: Response to your communication on Ethernet Traffic Parameters
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2006 23:16:13 +0100
Organization: Old Dog Consulting
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type="original"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Oct 2006 22:16:28.0053 (UTC) FILETIME=[8F455C50:01C6F0A7]
Sender: owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: cab78e1e39c4b328567edb48482b6a69
Hi Jim, In August the OIF sent CCAMP a communication about the use of the Ethernet Traffic parameters described in http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-ethernet-traffic-parameters-00.txt The communication asked a specific question: "One concern was expressed during the discussion in our meeting: the proposed format contains a switching granularity subfield that defines whether port or frame granularity switching is used, and there were comments that it is not the granularity of switching that needs to be specified, but the portion of the frame that is considered in forwarding. These are the Ethernet layers defined by IEEE standards that the OIF is considering. For example, we are currently looking at both Ethernet Private Line and Ethernet Virtual Private Line. In the latter case, switching is performed based on the VLAN identifier value, however the frame is still what is switched. We believe the terminology used in the new Tspec format may warrant further consideration in CCAMP." We agree, when frame-based switching is being applied it is important for an implementation to know what constitutes the label within each received frame. Without this knowledge, it is (of course) impossible to correctly switch the frames. However, it is not the job of the traffic parameters (i.e. the TSpec) to convey this information. Label type information is conveyed in the Generalized Label Request object. Specifically, the switching type is used to indicate what type of switching is required, although in many cases the label type should be obvious from the context of the TE link. The CCAMP working group is open to the specification of values for inclusion in the Generalized Label Request to identify different Ethernet frame switching paradigms, but please note that there are currently no Ethernet frame switching types defined as acceptable by the IEEE. When the IEEE has defined suitable data plane profiles, the CCAMP working group will be happy to accept work that clarifies how signaling should be used. Regards, Adrian Farrel and Deborah Brungard CCAMP Working Group Co-Chairs
- Response to your communication on Ethernet Traffi… Adrian Farrel
- RE: Response to your communication on Ethernet Tr… JONES Jim D