[Forces-protocol] Applying changes to Section 6 (Protocol Messages)

[Robert Haas <[e-mail]>]

Jamal: could you please send your potential-protocol-changes.txt file 
again ? I can take care of transfering the changes into section 6 unless 
someone else wants to do it.

All: below is a rough list of changes and pending issues regarding 
section 6. Please review.

 6.1.1 Association: The CE could obtain the HBI with a 
Query-SGT-FEProtocolLFP-HeartbeatInterval. Given the new Assoc msg 
strcutrue, we have to remove HBI from the Assoc Setup msg.

 6.1.2 How has the srcID=0 case been handled in the interop tests ? Is 
this really feasible ?

 6.2 Query: coarse FE info (inter/intra-FE topology, etc) goes into the 
FEProtocolLFB.

 6.4: Events: coarse CE and FE events go into CE/FEProtocolLFB. Note 
that for the sake of symmetry, we should introduce a CEProtocolLFB.

 6.6 State Maintenance: FE Activate/Deactivate/Shutdown become settable 
attributes in the FEProtocolLFB.

 6.7 HB remains as is.

In summary, we have the following operations defined for each message 
type ( I broke the table into 3 parts):

OPERATION       APPLICABLE MESSAGE TYPES

                Assoc-Setup  Assoc-Setup-Resp Assoc-Teardown Heartbeat

no operations
defined


                Query  Query-Resp  Config  Config-Resp
SET, DEL, UPDATE                     x          x
GET               x         x
EV_S, EV_U                           x          x

(for event subscribe/unsubscribe)


                Packet-Redir

PAYLOAD            x


                Event-Notif  Event-Notif-Resp
EVENT              x                x

Note that for Query(-Resp), Packet-Redir, and Event-Notif(-Resp), we 
have each time only one operation. Looks a bit redundant. Ideas ?

Regards,
-Robert

Ligang Dong wrote:

> hi,
> Yes. I think ONE person writes one section first, so that the writing 
> content and style are consistent throughout the section. Others give 
> the comments and help the main editor improve it. 
> Now let's volunteer to become the main editor of each section.
> Best regards
> Ligang
>
>     ----- Original Message -----
>     From: Robert Haas <mailto:[e-mail]>
>     To: Khosravi, Hormuzd M <mailto:[e-mail]>
>     Cc: [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> ;
>     [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> ;
>     [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> ; [e-mail]
>     <mailto:[e-mail]> ; Ligang Dong
>     <mailto:[e-mail]> ; Weiming Wang
>     <mailto:[e-mail]>
>     Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2004 10:04 PM
>     Subject: Re: [Forces-protocol] Re: protocol draft editing?
>
>     Hormuzd,
>     Section 6 is heavily impacted by the shift to "everything is an
>     LFB". Many sections and figures require complete re-editing. To
>     ensure consistency, we need one person to do one editing pass on
>     the entire section first. But your list says "everybody".
>
>     What if I do this first pass before tomorrow ? Or has anyone
>     started already ?
>
>     It also means that our description of the FE Protocol LFB must be
>     enhanced, possibly including the multicast table that Zsolt
>     started specifying.
>
>     Regards,
>     -Robert
>
>     Khosravi, Hormuzd M wrote:
>
>>Here is the distribution list...
>>
>>Abstract - Avri
>>1. Introduction - Avri
>>2. Definitions - Weiming
>>3. Protocol Overview - Jamal
>>4. TML Requirements - Jamal
>>5. Common Header - Weiming, Ligang (Jamal/Robert)
>>6. Protocol Messages - Hormuzd, Weiming (I expect everyone to be
>>involved with this one)
>>7. Protocol Scenarios - Hormuzd, Ram
>>8. High Availability - Hormuzd
>>9. Security Considerations - Ram
>>10. References - Avri
>>11. Acknowledgments - All
>>Appendix
>>A. Implementation Notes - All?
>>
>>I will directly modify the text for my particular section and send it
>>out to the team/Avri on a per section or per-subsection basis. That was
>>we can all work in parallel.
>>
>>regards
>>Hormuzd 
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Jamal Hadi Salim [mailto:[e-mail]] 
>>Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2004 5:35 AM
>>To: [e-mail]
>>Cc: [e-mail]; Khosravi, Hormuzd M; [e-mail]; Ligang Dong;
>>Weiming Wang; Robert Haas
>>Subject: Re: [Forces-protocol] Re: protocol draft editing?
>>
>>Avri must be on travel or tied up somewhere around the globe.
>>The latest i could find is:
>>http://psg.com/~avri/forces/draft/Archive-Forces-Protocol-02.zip
>>
>>Does anyone know if theres something newer or should we start here?
>>Hormuzd can you post that todo distribution?
>>
>>cheers,
>>jamal
>>
>>On Tue, 2004-10-19 at 19:23, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
>>  
>>
>>>On Tue, 2004-10-19 at 11:07, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
>>>    
>>>
>>>>Now that we seem to have made progress on the basics..
>>>>Avri,
>>>>Could you post a URL to the xml docs that we could start editing?
>>>>We could start with the TODO action items as posted by Hormuzd.
>>>>
>>>>cheers,
>>>>jamal
>>>>      
>>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>Forces-protocol mailing list
>>>[e-mail]
>>>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/forces-protocol
>>>    
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  
>>
>
>-- 
>Robert Haas
>IBM Zurich Research Laboratory
>Säumerstrasse 4
>CH-8803 Rüschlikon/Switzerland
>phone [phone]  fax [phone]  http://www.zurich.ibm.com/~rha
>

-- 
Robert Haas
IBM Zurich Research Laboratory
Säumerstrasse 4
CH-8803 Rüschlikon/Switzerland
phone [phone]  fax [phone]  http://www.zurich.ibm.com/~rha

_______________________________________________
Forces-protocol mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/forces-protocol