Re: [CCAMP] [CCAMP WG] #50: Identification of hexadecimal representation in G.709 vs decimal in GMPLS

Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> Mon, 13 May 2013 10:59 UTC

Return-Path: <lberger@labn.net>
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 61EB121F8935 for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 May 2013 03:59:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.265
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.265 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 93Us1AYpcmWa for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 May 2013 03:59:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from oproxy6-pub.bluehost.com (oproxy6-pub.bluehost.com [67.222.54.6]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 0738F21F85CE for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 May 2013 03:59:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 12746 invoked by uid 0); 13 May 2013 10:59:06 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO box313.bluehost.com) (69.89.31.113) by cpoproxy3.bluehost.com with SMTP; 13 May 2013 10:59:06 -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:CC:To:MIME-Version:From:Date:Message-ID; bh=aHQoNlhKCWYV54NSyEB+DzeL7I0Bm3RIQ2MmmZBeODk=; b=j0mFoQXf1jjzWivhqRGIXxnYvvGGe63yTmp+v36mFHyaHnZccQDKQpCgqloz/lO77ahrb98P2v1Si3NtDNKyiMVro8XpiMfu/K+WYDZbYqRcjeXF1eu9LA864IHe9d48;
Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113]:60171 helo=[127.0.0.1]) by box313.bluehost.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <lberger@labn.net>) id 1UbqTC-0002nV-Ay; Mon, 13 May 2013 04:59:06 -0600
Message-ID: <5190C777.2090100@labn.net>
Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 06:59:03 -0400
From: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Daniele Ceccarelli <daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com>
References: <059.82d98e9dee0226e015a3852ed4c8eece@trac.tools.ietf.org> <4A1562797D64E44993C5CBF38CF1BE480C70F8@ESESSMB301.ericsson.se>
In-Reply-To: <4A1562797D64E44993C5CBF38CF1BE480C70F8@ESESSMB301.ericsson.se>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Identified-User: {1038:box313.bluehost.com:labnmobi:labn.net} {sentby:smtp auth 69.89.31.113 authed with lberger@labn.net}
Cc: "draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-g709-info-model@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-g709-info-model@tools.ietf.org>, "ccamp-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <ccamp-chairs@tools.ietf.org>, CCAMP <ccamp@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] [CCAMP WG] #50: Identification of hexadecimal representation in G.709 vs decimal in GMPLS
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: Mon, 13 May 2013 10:59:32 -0000

Daniele,

On 5/13/2013 4:03 AM, Daniele Ceccarelli wrote:
> Lou, CCAMP,
> 
> This is the proposed text for the info-model wrt the decimal vs
> hexadecimal encoding issue.
> 

I think the author's preference of not using the 0x prefix to
hexadecimal representation is viable if it is clear in the document (as
you mention below) and you can point to precedent of similar usage in
existing RFCs.  Have you checked / can you check to see if there's such?

> 
> 
> 13.  Identification of hexadecimal representation in G.709 vs decimal in
>      GMPLS considerations
> 
>    Encoding in GMPLS foresses the utilization of hexadecimal values
>    format "0x" while in the data plane documents, like G.709
>    reccomendation, the format usually used is the decimal one (e.g.
>    G-PID in RSVP-TE vs Payload Type in G.709). 
> 

Assuming we go this way: I understand your intent, but I think you're
actually stating exactly the opposite.  How about, simply:

  Note that the Payload Types (PT) defined in [G709-2012], and repeated
  in this document, are provided in hexadecimal representation without
  the commonly used '0x' prefix.

Lou

> BR
> Daniele & Sergio
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ccamp issue tracker [mailto:trac+ccamp@trac.tools.ietf.org] 
>> Sent: mercoledì 8 maggio 2013 19.22
>> To: draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-g709-info-model@tools.ietf.org; 
>> lberger@labn.net
>> Cc: ccamp-chairs@tools.ietf.org
>> Subject: [CCAMP WG] #50: Identification of hexadecimal 
>> representation in G.709 vs decimal in GMPLS
>>
>> #50: Identification of hexadecimal representation in G.709 vs 
>> decimal in GMPLS
>>
>> From: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ccamp/current/msg14812.html
>>
>>   The authors had previously stated the intent to just make this clear
>>   in the signaling document.  I'd like to make an alternate proposal:
>>   let's do the the obvious and have the documents simply use 
>> the normal
>>   (IETF) convention of using a '0x' prefix anytime a hexadecimal value
>>   is represented. I believe this means that only the info-model draft
>>   needs to be updated.
>>
>> -- 
>> -------------------------------------+-------------------------
>> ---------
>> -------------------------------------+---
>> Reporter:  lberger@labn.net         |      Owner:  draft-ietf-ccamp-
>>     Type:  task                     |  
>> otn-g709-info-model@tools.ietf.org
>> Priority:  major                    |     Status:  new
>> Component:  otn-g709-info-model      |  Milestone:  Post WG Last Call
>> Severity:  Waiting for Document     |    Version:
>>  Update                             |   Keywords:
>> -------------------------------------+-------------------------
>> ---------
>> -------------------------------------+---
>>
>> Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/ccamp/trac/ticket/50>
>> CCAMP WG <http://tools.ietf.org/wg/ccamp/> Common Control and 
>> Measurement Plane Working Group
>>
> 
> 
>