Re: [CCAMP] Still have issues in WSON Processing HOP Attribute Encoding in draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-signaling-08

[Leeyoung <[e-mail]>]

Hi Lou,

Since the LSP_REQUIRED_ATTRIBUTES object is meant to allow each transit node to inspect the TLV's under it, each transit node will inspect RBI or WA method and apply if it has relevance for the node; otherwise just pass to the next hop. (Section 5 of RFC 5420 has this clause: "This means that this object SHOULD only be
used for attributes that require support at some transit LSRs and so require examination at all transit LSRs.")

This may not be optimal but a way to get around technical changes as you pointed out not to do so at this moment. 

If we want this to be optimal and require technical changes to the draft, we can go with an alternative, utilizing [RSVP-RO] draft with ERO subobject/HOP Attributes to encode RBI or WA method as its TLVs. 

Whichever the WG wants, we can go either way. 

Thanks,
Young

-----Original Message-----
From: Lou Berger [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2014 3:44 PM
To: Leeyoung; CCAMP; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] Still have issues in WSON Processing HOP Attribute Encoding in draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-signaling-08

Young,
   
On 8/4/2014 4:29 PM, Leeyoung wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Lou, here's my comment on your comment. In a nutshell replacing [RSVP-RO] with [RFC5420] will solve the confusion. 
>
> Please see in-line for details.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Young
So you are saying that Resource Block Information and Wavelength Assignment Method are encoded end-to-end and *never* have hop/node/interface specific meaning (as they are each encoded as an Attribute TLV in an LSP_REQUIRED_ATTRIBUTE object), is this correct?

ARE YOU SURE?  

How do you envision the LSP_REQUIRED_ATTRIBUTE object conveying per-hop information? (As discussed in section 3.2 and the first paragraph on section 4.2.)

Lou
....