Re: [karp] Comment on LMP Analysis Presentation

Lou Berger <> Wed, 31 July 2013 15:19 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81F7721F9CE9 for <>; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 08:19:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.66
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.66 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.605, BAYES_00=-2.599, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gZW6qIIsjm26 for <>; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 08:19:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with SMTP id 7A5BA21F9CF5 for <>; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 08:19:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 6313 invoked by uid 0); 31 Jul 2013 15:18:59 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO ( by with SMTP; 31 Jul 2013 15:18:59 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=default; h=Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Date:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Cc:To:Subject:From; bh=it98YhzYfc003ykG97Mi7Hfl2qss1NA7Ww0QoHsGR9k=; b=rlhXKyhUoIwAE8BmYmFZTKp8XL+71Ftqkf8ihbddkvZ435QIakLuUJBYc1jJTGvQcUb1FEg+b9jH83x3d6jV6WWioMbgmMWE/pBcPDXldDmgEdhw8AJBUa/N08zOyxx7;
Received: from [] (port=35667 helo=localhost) by with esmtpa (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <>) id 1V4YB0-0005G0-Fp; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 09:18:59 -0600
From: Lou Berger <>
To: Acee Lindem <>
Message-ID: <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 17:17:44 +0200 (CEST)
User-Agent: ProfiMailGo/4.10.00
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Identified-User: {} {sentby:smtp auth authed with}
Cc: "" <>
Subject: Re: [karp] Comment on LMP Analysis Presentation
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion list for key management for routing and transport protocols <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 15:19:34 -0000

I think acee is right, LMP doesn't use TCP.


On 2:05pm, July 31, 2013, Acee Lindem wrote:
> Hi Mahesh, et al, 
> I couldn't find the requirement for TCP packets in the LMP protocol. Perhaps, it isn't needed. I'm not an LMP expert but there could be confusion due to the reuse  of the ASON terminology. See this excerpt from RFC 4394: 
> 2. ASON Terminology and Abbreviations Related to Discovery ITU-T Recommendation G.8080 Amendment 1 [G.8080] and ITU-T Recommendation G.7714 [G.7714] provide definitions and mechanisms related to transport plane discovery. Note that in the context of this work, "Transport" relates to the data plane (sometimes called the transport plane or the user plane) and does not refer to the transport layer (layer 4) of the OSI seven layer model, nor to the concept of transport intended by protocols such as the Transmission Control Protocol (TCP). Special care must be taken with the acronym "TCP", which within the context of the rest of this document means "Termination Connection Point" and does not indicate the Transmission Control Protocol. 
> Thanks, Acee