Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-wson-encode
Leeyoung <leeyoung@huawei.com> Wed, 13 November 2013 02:06 UTC
Return-Path: <leeyoung@huawei.com>
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 66AFA21E8139 for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Nov 2013 18:06:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.356
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.356 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.243, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 qoAU4zuBYMh0 for <ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Nov 2013 18:06:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D91021E8131 for <ccamp@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Nov 2013 18:06:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id AXU98093; Wed, 13 Nov 2013 02:06:07 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from LHREML403-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.217) by lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.7.223) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Wed, 13 Nov 2013 02:05:10 +0000
Received: from DFWEML405-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.102) by lhreml403-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.217) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Wed, 13 Nov 2013 02:06:06 +0000
Received: from dfweml511-mbs.china.huawei.com ([169.254.15.141]) by dfweml405-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.193.5.102]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Tue, 12 Nov 2013 18:06:02 -0800
From: Leeyoung <leeyoung@huawei.com>
To: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>, CCAMP <ccamp@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-wson-encode@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-wson-encode@tools.ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-wson-encode
Thread-Index: AQHO1NSag8RQYrwjyUubb+r8ssXAkZoiUdTw
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2013 02:06:01 +0000
Message-ID: <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E17291E3AF2@dfweml511-mbs.china.huawei.com>
References: <524AF9A9.3040006@labn.net> <5266E138.8080605@labn.net> <526FFE06.20207@labn.net>
In-Reply-To: <526FFE06.20207@labn.net>
Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.192.11.125]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-wson-encode
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: Wed, 13 Nov 2013 02:06:14 -0000
Hi Lou, Please see inline for my responses to your comments. Let me know if there are still further issues. Thanks. Young -----Original Message----- From: Lou Berger [mailto:lberger@labn.net] Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2013 1:27 PM To: CCAMP; draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-wson-encode@tools.ietf.org Subject: Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-wson-encode Authors, I have some comments on this document. Many are strictly editorial. Note that I'm the document shepherd, see RFC 4858 for more information. - Please address my general comments on the WSON document set YOUNG>> Done. See Terminology Section changed as follows: Refer to [RFC6163] for CWDM, DWDM, RWA, WDM. Refer to Section 5 of [Gen-Encode] for the terminology of Resources, Resources Blocks, and Resource Pool. - section 1 This document makes use of the Label Set Field encoding of [Gen-Encode] and refers to it as a Wavelength Set Field. Why? Why not just refer to it as Label Set? Perhaps you mean that a Wavelength Set Field is a Label Set Field that MUST carry a label as defined in RFC6205? If so, this needs to be made explicit. (probably in a section other than the introduction.) YOUNG>> Moved the text from introduction to Section 3.1 and added the : "The For the Input and Output Link Set Fields, the Link Set Field encoding defined in [Gen-Encode] is to be used. A Label Set Field MUST carry a label as defined in [RFC6205]." - section2/3 section alignment with rwa-info It's probably a good idea to align naming and ordering wherever possible. YOUNG>> Aligned where possible. - section 2 1st two paragraphs. Why does this section try to introduce concepts that are defined in 6163 and in [WSON-INFO]? Is something missing from those documents? If so, at least wson info should be fixed. If not, these paragraphs should be replaced with simple terminology/concept references. YOUNG>> Added "Refer to Section 5 of [Gen-Encode] for the terminology of Resources, Resources Blocks, and Resource Pool." (Terminology Section). YOUNG>> Added the following paragraph in the beginning of Section 2. "This section provides encodings for the information elements defined in [RWA-INFO] that have applicability to WSON. The encodings are designed to be suitable for use in the GMPLS routing protocols OSPF [RFC4203] and IS-IS [RFC5307] and in the PCE protocol (PCEP) [RFC5440]. Note that the information distributed in [RFC4203] and [RFC5307] is arranged via the nesting of sub-TLVs within TLVs and this document defines elements to be used within such constructs." - Section 2, same comment WRT TLVs as made on general-constraint- encode: The text reads: This document defines the following sub-TLVs pertaining to resources within an optical node: All references to sub-TLVs should dropped, again see related comment in my may on general-constraint-encode. This doesn't hold for sub-sub-TLVs, and I'll get to this below. YOUNG>> sub-TLVs dropped. - Section 3.1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 | Connectivity | Why is connectivity a byte here, but only a bit in section 2.1? Either it should be a bit here to, or section 2.1 should be a byte. Note, that this can be fixed in a compatible way by defining it here as: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 | Reserved |C| YOUNG>> Your suggested encoding accepted. - Section 4. The definitions of sub-sub-TLVs are a bit underspecified. Some specific questions to address: - Are there any sub-sub-TLV ordering requirements? YOUNG>> No. - How are multiple sub-sub-TLVs of the same type to be handled? YOUNG>> I don't see why there are multiple sub-sub-TLVs of the same type. In case where there are multiple sub-sub-TLVs of the same type, there would be no error as these information are not order-sensitive. Is this what you have in mind? - What is the sub-sub-TLV header (TL format)? YOUNG>> Added TLV format - Are there any alignment requirements? YOUNG>> Not sure what this is. - What happens when a sub-sub-TLV is larger than 256 bytes? (There are already systems that advertise 192 wavelengths on a fiber and an application code takes 8 bytes, right? But of course this presents a problem when carried within an RSVP object too.) If you find you need more specifics, we can discuss / I can propose new text. Feel free to discuss the details on or off list (your choice.) YOUNG>> Please see the other email response to this comment. - Section 4.1 Title and 1st sentence don't agree on the element's name. YOUNG>> Aligned. - Section 3.4, 4.1 - Bits I & E are defined here, but I & O are used in parallel ways in Section 3.2. For consistency it should be I & O everywhere (to match input and output). YOUNG>> Corrected to I & O. - Section 4.2.1 s/[ITU-G.695.1]/[ITU-G.695] YOUNG>> Done. - Section 4.2.2, 4.2.3 Why do you use bit names that are different than the ITU-T definitions for p and s (rather than D and F)? YOUNG>> Changed to D and F now. WRT Section 8: - [RFC3471] is an informative reference. - [Gen-Encode] needs to be normative, this document reuses its definitions. - I'm surprised [WSON-Info] is informative (and not normative). Do you think this is correct? YOUNG>> All corrected. [WSON-Info] is normative. That's it on this one, Lou On 10/22/2013 4:34 PM, Lou Berger wrote: > > All, > Given the recent draft submission deadline and only one comment being > received to date, we'd like to extend the WG more time for review. > > These drafts represent significant work by the authors and WG, so > please review and let the WG know what you think (positive or negative)! > > Please have all comments in by October 29. > > Thank you, > Lou (and Deborah) > > On 10/1/2013 12:34 PM, Lou Berger wrote: >> All, >> >> This mail begins working group last call on the WSON documents. As >> there are 6 documents in this set, the last call will be three weeks. >> The documents included in the last call are: >> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-18 >> (Informational, IPR Disclosed) >> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode >> -11 >> (Standards Track, IPR Disclosed) >> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-wson-encode-21 >> (Standards Track) >> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-general-constraints >> -ospf-te-05 >> (Standards Track, IPR Disclosed) >> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-signal-compatibility >> -ospf-12 >> (Standards Track, IPR Disclosed) >> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-signaling-06 >> (Standards >> Track) Also has one open issue that will need to be resolved as part >> of LC, see http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/ccamp/trac/ticket/52. >> >> This working group last call ends on October 22. Comments should be >> sent to the CCAMP mailing list. Please remember to include the >> technical basis for any comments. >> >> Positive comments, e.g., "I've reviewed this document and believe it >> is ready for publication", are welcome! >> >> Please note that we're still missing some IPR statements. Any >> forthcoming publication request will be delayed by late IPR >> statements/disclosures. >> >> >> Thank you, >> Lou (and Deborah) >> _______________________________________________ >> CCAMP mailing list >> CCAMP@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp >> >> >> >> > _______________________________________________ > CCAMP mailing list > CCAMP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp > > > >
- [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - rwa-info, … Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - rwa-in… Margaria, Cyril (Coriant - DE/Munich)
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - rwa-in… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - rwa-in… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - rwa-in… Giovanni Martinelli (giomarti)
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - rwa-in… Giovanni Martinelli (giomarti)
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - rwa-in… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - rwa-in… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - rwa-in… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - rwa-in… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - rwa-in… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Leeyoung
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Giovanni Martinelli (giomarti)
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Giovanni Martinelli (giomarti)
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Giovanni Martinelli (giomarti)
- Re: [CCAMP] WG Last Call: WSON documents - draft-… Lou Berger