[Forces-protocol] Re: Section 6 update

["Wang,Weiming" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Robert,
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Robert Haas 
  To: Wang,Weiming 
  Cc: Khosravi, Hormuzd M ; Ligang Dong ; [e-mail] ; [e-mail] ; [e-mail] ; [e-mail] 
  Sent: Friday, October 22, 2004 5:33 PM
  Subject: Re: Section 6 update


  Weiming.
  I suggest we make a  new section "FE LFB and FE Protocol LFB" just before Section 5 "Common Header", instead of leaving this to section 3.3.2. 
  This will reflect the importance of those two LFBs in the operation of the protocol.
  [Weiming]I'm not objective to this, just a little worry if it may make the whoel text change too much(some cross references of section number). What I see more is if we need to add a sub section to detailedly define the attributes mentioned. Talking about this, one thing I'm not very sure of your idea is, do you think these attributes of LFBs (or even the whole LFB definition ) should be defined by our protocol or by FE model? I just see that there is some logical problem if it is defined by FE model.

  I'll post my text when ready, please do the same, and we'll merge.
  [Weiming]I think your current version has already done well and  made good summary on the issue. I'l be more interested in trying to input something based on your text. To join in, because as you know this part is one of that I'm most interested and I hope to have more exchange with you on this later.  We'v actually implemented such model in our testbed. 
  Best regards,
  Weiming

  -Robert

  Wang,Weiming wrote:

    Robert, 

    Don't worry too much about the FE LFB and Protocol LFB, I think it can be fit it well in the sections.

    Actually I can do something for Protocol LFB and FE LFB if you think possible.

    Regards,
    Weiming

    ----- Original Message ----- 
      From: Khosravi, Hormuzd M 
      To: Robert Haas 
      Cc: Ligang Dong ; [e-mail] ; [e-mail] ; [e-mail] ; Weiming Wang ; [e-mail] 
      Sent: Friday, October 22, 2004 4:35 PM
      Subject: Section 6 update


      Hi Robert, All



      Here you go.I have updated sections 6.1, 6.3, 6.6 (remove), 6.7 (same). I have directly used the text that Jamal sent out wherever applicable.

      You can update sections 6.2, 6.4, 6.5 -> however, I would check with Weiming first as courtesy since he is working on these sections.



      BTW, there were lots of things in the todo list I sent out.



      Header Section - Jamal/Robert/Weiming?

      Protocol LFB - Robert/Others?

      FE LFB - Robert/Others?

      CE LFB - ?

      State Machine for Protocol - Ligang (taken)



      Will you be working on any of these ??



      Pls do let us know.I will start working on whatever hasn't been claimed by tomorrow morning my time.



      Thanks

      Hormuzd




--------------------------------------------------------------------------

      From: Robert Haas [mailto:[e-mail]] 
      Sent: Friday, October 22, 2004 12:39 AM
      To: Khosravi, Hormuzd M
      Cc: Ligang Dong; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; Weiming Wang; [e-mail]
      Subject: Re: Applying changes to Section 6 (Protocol Messages)



      Hormuzd,
      Could you please pass the token on section 6 together with your latest version so I can start editing it ?
      Thanks,
      -Robert

      Khosravi, Hormuzd M wrote:



      Robert,



      As I said, your note mostly looks...I have put some more comments below...

      (It would help a lot if you start defining the FE, Protocol LFBs...)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------

      From: Robert Haas [mailto:[e-mail]] 


      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.  [Agreed, this would be part of ProtocolLFB even if it is in this message] 

       6.1.2 How has the srcID=0 case been handled in the interop tests ? Is this really feasible ?  [Yes it worked fine during Interop] 

       6.2 Query: coarse FE info (inter/intra-FE topology, etc) goes into the FEProtocolLFB.  [Agreed it would be in some LFB, but not sure which LFB this would be part of...?] 

       6.4: Events: coarse CE and FE events go into CE/FEProtocolLFB. Note that for the sake of symmetry, we should introduce a CEProtocolLFB.  [Sure, why dont you start defining some of these objects...then we can discuss more in detail] 

       6.6 State Maintenance: FE Activate/Deactivate/Shutdown become settable attributes in the FEProtocolLFB.  [Yes, these messages will be part of Events or Config...we need to specify this] 

       6.7 HB remains as is.  [Agreed] 

      In summary, we have the following operations defined for each message type ( I broke the table into 3 parts):
       [looks good!] 
      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 ?  [These are all very different, lets leave them as is, its not necessary to have multiple operations in all messages] 

      Regards,
      -Robert





-- 
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