Re: [CCAMP] [Teas] ID Tracker State Update Notice: <draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-availability-extension-08.txt>

sounds good to me, I also support generalized SCSI.

(sorry for being so silent on former discussion) 

Cheers
G

> On 04 Nov 2016, at 06:54, Yemin (Amy) <amy.yemin@huawei.com> wrote:
> 
> I support the approach to define a generalized SCSI. 
> With the generalized SCSI , if a new TLV can be applied to multiple technologies, there's no need to define the type under each technologies specific SC. 
> Association with this generalized SCSI will simplify the process. 
> This could resolve the problem that SCSI in RFC4203 doesn't support TLV format. 
> 
> BR,
> Amy 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniele Ceccarelli [mailto:daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com] 
> Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 12:47 AM
> To: BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A; ccamp@ietf.org; TEAS WG (teas@ietf.org)
> Cc: draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-availability-extension@ietf.org; ccamp-chairs@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: ID Tracker State Update Notice: <draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-availability-extension-08.txt>
> 
> Thanks Deborah for triggering this.
> 
> CCAMP, TEAS, 
> 
> in agreement with the TEAS chairs and Deborah we decided to write a new draft in TEAS defining a generalized SCSI of the ISCD. The generalized SCSI can include a number of SCSI sub-TLVs.
> The generalized SCSI can be used only with "new" switching capabilities. Quoting the draft: 
> 
> " Generalized SCSI MUST NOT be used for ISCDs of technologies whose
>   Switching Capability definition do not reference this document."
> 
> The draft also defines a new registry the "Generalized SCSI (Switching Capability Specific Information) TLVs  Types" registry.
> 
> The idea is to reshape draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-availability-extensions to define the ISCD Availability sub-TLV as one of the sub-TLVs supported by the Generalized SCSI. (Value 1 of the registry should be assigned).
> 
> The draft can be found at the following link: 
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ceccarelli-teas-gneralized-scsi-00 
> 
> Please send your comments to both the mailing lists.
> 
> Thanks
> Daniele
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A [mailto:db3546@att.com]
>> Sent: giovedì 3 novembre 2016 17:02
>> To: ccamp@ietf.org
>> Cc: draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-availability-extension@ietf.org; ccamp- 
>> chairs@ietf.org
>> Subject: RE: ID Tracker State Update Notice: <draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf- 
>> availability-extension-08.txt>
>> 
>> Hi CCAMP,
>> 
>> As a result of the Gen-ATR review and issues raised, I removed this 
>> document from today's telechat. Your Chairs, Authors, and I decided 
>> the best approach would be for me to return this document to the 
>> Working Group to further discuss how to progress.
>> 
>> Best regards and safe travels for those going to Seoul- Deborah
>> 
>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: IETF Secretariat [mailto:ietf-secretariat-reply@ietf.org]
>>> Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2016 9:58 AM
>>> To: zhangfatai@huawei.com; Fatai Zhang <zhangfatai@huawei.com>;
>> ccamp-
>>> chairs@ietf.org; BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A <db3546@att.com>; draft-ietf- 
>>> ccamp-ospf-availability-extension@ietf.org
>>> Subject: ID Tracker State Update Notice:
>>> <draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-availability-
>>> extension-08.txt>
>>> 
>>> IESG state changed to AD is watching::Revised I-D Needed from IESG 
>>> Evaluation ID Tracker URL:
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-
>>> availability-extension/
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Teas mailing list
> Teas@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas