RE: [L2CP] TLV number clash in new wadhwa draft

Peter
  Most of this doesn't belong to the list. Let us limit the discussion
here to technical issues if any with the current version of the draft.

Thanks
-Sanjay

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Peter Arberg [mailto:parberg@redback.com]
>Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 12:08 AM
>To: 'Jakob Heitz'; l2cp@ietf.org
>Subject: RE: [L2CP] TLV number clash in new wadhwa draft
>
>
>So at the moment there is no need to even read the new draft.
>
>Most of these changes is done because I have requested them
>based on other customer discussions, non DT, and to make ANCP
>more compliant to TR-101 from information it includes.
>
>But unfortunately the update is not made consistent, so there
>is even number disagreement inside the draft.
>
>So for now, forget it is there, and stay at the .0 draft.
>
>This .01 version is actually a lot closer to the PDD, but since
>mainly the DSLAM vendors kept arguing against the draft, and 
>Wadhwa was to slow to get it out, it will not make the DT trail
>which was the idea back in January.
>
>Peter
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Jakob Heitz [mailto:jheitz@redback.com] 
>> Sent: 22. maj 2006 15:20
>> To: l2cp@ietf.org
>> Subject: Re: [L2CP] TLV number clash in new wadhwa draft
>> 
>> Also, Access-Aggregation-Circuit-ID-ASCII
>> for VLAN is specified thus:
>> Access-Node-Identifier eth slot/port [:inner-vlan-id][:outer-vlan-id]
>> 
>> Could we swap the outer and inner, like this ?
>> Access-Node-Identifier eth slot/port [:outer-vlan-id][:inner-vlan-id]
>> 
>> Jakob Heitz wrote:
>> > For PORT UP TLVs, new addition,
>> >        2. Type (Access-Loop-Remote-Id = 0x02)
>> > required a renumbering of
>> >        3. Type (Access-Aggregation-Circuit-ID-Binary = 0x04)
>> > from 0x02 to 0x04.
>> > However,
>> >        5. Type (DSL Line Attributes = 0x04):
>> > is 0x04. A clash!
>> > Because this one contains its own TLVs, is it even needed?
>> > The encapsulated TLVs have no numbering clashes.
>> > 
>> > 
>> > The new version is incompatible with the old due to
>> > the renumbered items. Therefore could we please
>> > bump the version, say to 0x32.
>> > 
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > L2cp mailing list
>> > L2cp@ietf.org
>> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l2cp
>> 
>> -- 
>> Jakob Heitz. x5475. 510-566-2901
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> L2cp mailing list
>> L2cp@ietf.org
>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l2cp
>> 
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>L2cp mailing list
>L2cp@ietf.org
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l2cp
>

_______________________________________________
L2cp mailing list
L2cp@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l2cp