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

[Daniele Ceccarelli <[e-mail]>]

Hi Fatai,

Yes, good comment, thanks.

Daniele 

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Fatai Zhang [mailto:[e-mail]] 
>Sent: lunedì 13 maggio 2013 11.43
>To: Daniele Ceccarelli; 
>[e-mail]; [e-mail]
>Cc: [e-mail]; CCAMP
>Subject: RE: [CCAMP WG] #50: Identification of hexadecimal 
>representation in G.709 vs decimal in GMPLS
>
>Hi Daniele,
>
>I think it is better to use the reference format when 
>mentioning some data plane documents, e.g., [G709-2012].
>
>
>
>
>
>Best Regards
>
>Fatai
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Daniele Ceccarelli [mailto:[e-mail]]
>Sent: Monday, May 13, 2013 4:03 PM
>To: [e-mail]; 
>[e-mail]
>Cc: [e-mail]; CCAMP
>Subject: RE: [CCAMP WG] #50: Identification of hexadecimal 
>representation in G.709 vs decimal in GMPLS
>
>Lou, CCAMP,
>
>This is the proposed text for the info-model wrt the decimal 
>vs hexadecimal encoding issue.
>
>
>
>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). 
>
>BR
>Daniele & Sergio
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: ccamp issue tracker [mailto:[e-mail]]
>>Sent: mercoledì 8 maggio 2013 19.22
>>To: [e-mail];
>>[e-mail]
>>Cc: [e-mail]
>>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:  [e-mail]         |      Owner:  draft-ietf-ccamp-
>>     Type:  task                     |  
>>[e-mail]
>> 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
>>
>