Re: [Forces-protocol] FE Protocol LFB, FE LFB, CE LFB (draft sections) to review.
"Wang,Weiming" <wmwang@mail.hzic.edu.cn> Sun, 24 October 2004 12:07 UTC
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA22751 for <forces-protocol-web-archive@ietf.org>; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 08:07:38 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CLhNA-0004ro-58 for forces-protocol-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 08:21:20 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CLh68-0002Hd-St; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 08:03:44 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CLgzU-0001Op-Km for forces-protocol@megatron.ietf.org; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 07:56:52 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA22020 for <forces-protocol@ietf.org>; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 07:56:51 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [202.96.99.56] (helo=202.96.99.56) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CLhCg-0004gL-SP for forces-protocol@ietf.org; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 08:10:33 -0400
Received: from [202.96.99.59] by 202.96.99.56 with StormMail ESMTP id 99432.341813895; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 20:16:30 +0800 (CST)
Received: from WWM (unverified [202.96.99.60]) by mail.gsu.cn (Rockliffe SMTPRA 6.0.11) with ESMTP id <B0000087192@mail.gsu.cn>; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 19:52:22 +0800
Message-ID: <124b01c4b9c0$3698cee0$845c21d2@Necom.hzic.edu.cn>
From: "Wang,Weiming" <wmwang@mail.hzic.edu.cn>
To: Robert Haas <rha@zurich.ibm.com>, avri@psg.com
References: <468F3FDA28AA87429AD807992E22D07E02579210@orsmsx408> <1E526654-24BF-11D9-9DB1-000393CC2112@psg.com> <417A23E6.7010504@zurich.ibm.com> <C4CB0B3C-251F-11D9-9DB1-000393CC2112@psg.com> <417AADED.9080605@zurich.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [Forces-protocol] FE Protocol LFB, FE LFB, CE LFB (draft sections) to review.
Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 19:54:27 +0800
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 02ec665d00de228c50c93ed6b5e4fc1a
Cc: ram.gopal@nokia.com, "Khosravi, Hormuzd M" <hormuzd.m.khosravi@intel.com>, hadi@znyx.com, Ligang Dong <donglg@mail.hzic.edu.cn>, forces-protocol@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: forces-protocol@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: forces-protocol <forces-protocol.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/forces-protocol>, <mailto:forces-protocol-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/forces-protocol>
List-Post: <mailto:forces-protocol@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:forces-protocol-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/forces-protocol>, <mailto:forces-protocol-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: forces-protocol-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: forces-protocol-bounces@ietf.org
X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: b4a0a5f5992e2a4954405484e7717d8c
Robert, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Haas" <rha@zurich.ibm.com> > @@ -33,15 +34,18 @@ > Current version of the ForCES protocol > Current version of the FE model > - FE unicast ID(s) (list) > + FE unicast ID > FE multicast ID(s) (list) > Association Expiry Timer > Heartbeat Interval > Primary CE > FE failover and restart policy > + CE failover and restart policy [XXX: what is the diff with FE failover ?] [Weiming] I agree your idea that these two may be merged. Say it as 'CE and FE failover policy' ? > + > +[TBD: define default values for each attribute if applicable] > > Section X.2 > > @@ -53,11 +57,12 @@ > FEStatusChange (events that signal FE Up/Down/Active/Inactive/Failover) > FE DoS alert > FE capability change > FE attributes: > - FEStatusChange (to set the FE in Active, Inactive, or Shutdown mode > [Note: this replies the State Maintenance messages]) > + FEStatusChange (to set the FE in Active, Inactive, or Shutdown mode > [Note: this replaces the State Maintenance messages]) > MIID table (a list of virtual LFB Instance IDs that map to a list of > Instance IDs of LFBs in that FE [Refer to Zsolt's note]) > FE Behavior Exp. Timer > HA Mode > + FE DoS protection policy > [the attributes below were previously under Query message] [Weiming] this editorial note is not needed anymore, fore I'v already removed the following items. > Inter-FE topology > Intra-FE topology > @@ -67,8 +72,8 @@ > > The CE LFB is a logical entity in each CE and contains attributes > relative to the CE itself, and not to the operation of the ForCES protocol. > > - The FE LFB consists of the following elements: > +The CE LFB consists of the following elements: > CE Events: > CEAllEvents (subscribing to this corresponds to subscribing to all > events below) [Do we want to allow an FE to explicitely subscribe to CE > events ?] > CEStatusChange (events that signal CE > Up/Down/Active/Inactive/Failover) [Such events do not necessarily need > to be subscribed to, they can fire even without subscription and inform > the FE] _______________________________________________ Forces-protocol mailing list Forces-protocol@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/forces-protocol
- RE: [Forces-protocol] Header Section Khosravi, Hormuzd M
- RE: [Forces-protocol] Header Section Jamal Hadi Salim
- Re: [Forces-protocol] Header Section avri
- RE: [Forces-protocol] Header Section Khosravi, Hormuzd M
- Re: [Forces-protocol] Header Section avri
- Re: [Forces-protocol] Header Section Wang,Weiming
- [Forces-protocol] FE Protocol LFB, FE LFB, CE LFB… Robert Haas
- Re: [Forces-protocol] FE Protocol LFB, FE LFB, CE… Weiming Wang
- Re: [Forces-protocol] FE Protocol LFB, FE LFB, CE… avri
- Re: [Forces-protocol] FE Protocol LFB, FE LFB, CE… Robert Haas
- Re: [Forces-protocol] FE Protocol LFB, FE LFB, CE… Robert Haas
- Re: [Forces-protocol] FE Protocol LFB, FE LFB, CE… Jamal Hadi Salim
- [Forces-protocol] querry message (path vs attribu… Jamal Hadi Salim
- Re: [Forces-protocol] Header Section Jamal Hadi Salim
- Re: [Forces-protocol] FE Protocol LFB, FE LFB, CE… Robert Haas
- Re: [Forces-protocol] FE Protocol LFB, FE LFB,CE … Jamal Hadi Salim
- [Forces-protocol] 01-5 avri
- [Forces-protocol] Feedback section 6.1. Jamal Hadi Salim
- [Forces-protocol] Feedback: Section 6.2 Jamal Hadi Salim
- [Forces-protocol] Feedback on section 6.3 Jamal Hadi Salim
- [Forces-protocol] Feedback: Section 6.4 Jamal Hadi Salim
- [Forces-protocol] Feedback on section 6.5 Jamal Hadi Salim
- [Forces-protocol] Feedback on rest of section 6 Jamal Hadi Salim
- [Forces-protocol] Re: querry message (path vs att… Wang,Weiming
- Re: [Forces-protocol] FE Protocol LFB, FE LFB, CE… Wang,Weiming
- [Forces-protocol] Re: 01-5 Wang,Weiming
- Re: [Forces-protocol] Feedback: Section 6.4 Wang,Weiming
- Re: [Forces-protocol] Feedback on section 6.5 Wang,Weiming
- Re: [Forces-protocol] Re: querry message (path vs… Jamal Hadi Salim
- Re: [Forces-protocol] Feedback: Section 6.4 Jamal Hadi Salim
- Re: [Forces-protocol] Feedback on section 6.5 Jamal Hadi Salim
- [Forces-protocol] Re: 01-5 avri
- [Forces-protocol] Re: 01-5 Jamal Hadi Salim
- [Forces-protocol] Re: 01-5 avri
- [Forces-protocol] Re: 01-5 Jamal Hadi Salim
- Re: [Forces-protocol] Re: querry message (path vs… Wang,Weiming
- Re: [Forces-protocol] Feedback: Section 6.4 Wang,Weiming
- Re: [Forces-protocol] Re: querry message (path vs… Jamal Hadi Salim
- Re: [Forces-protocol] Feedback: Section 6.4 Jamal Hadi Salim
- [Forces-protocol] 01-7 avri
- Re: [Forces-protocol] Feedback: Section 6.4 Wang,Weiming
- Re: [Forces-protocol] Feedback: Section 6.4 Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [Forces-protocol] Feedback: Section 6.4 avri
- Re: [Forces-protocol] Feedback: Section 6.4 Wang,Weiming
- Re: [Forces-protocol] Feedback: Section 6.4 Jamal Hadi Salim
- Re: [Forces-protocol] Feedback: Section 6.4 Joel M. Halpern
- [Forces-protocol] Resend: Feedback: Section 6.2 Jamal Hadi Salim