Re: [manet-dlep-rg] Resources TLV

Teco Boot <teco@inf-net.nl> Mon, 11 November 2013 18:04 UTC

Return-Path: <teco@inf-net.nl>
X-Original-To: manet-dlep-rg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: manet-dlep-rg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CC0D11E81B2 for <manet-dlep-rg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 10:04:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.561
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.561 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.038, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JJZK5n6IimzK for <manet-dlep-rg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 10:04:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ea0-f181.google.com (mail-ea0-f181.google.com [209.85.215.181]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1367C11E810F for <manet-dlep-rg@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 10:04:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ea0-f181.google.com with SMTP id q10so500594ead.26 for <manet-dlep-rg@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 10:04:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:content-type:mime-version:subject:from :in-reply-to:date:cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references :to; bh=YhAb7oTLcrISO97z+GMywt/roy7Yqf9TrkNZ89M3M9w=; b=gasz97h0iZj20OXHcXMm82ulWzSB4+SNJ80/ghSGU7AJLaLH79c/JdthryqA9KJwMI hOm8zkS+jZQmJWqW3WlmnWRwtmRSKj+6vvTrv9gDMMhb8nFE/99bdyHYxukyiMmb4WLu Yt9Hgz6CcunhaEFnwKtXFegIp0BtrvdydIQuyTqtabKxGLvUVVw/RMRPZywNCyntcwts oo8wytMIxQZ3kj6TP+ZH1LHABIVMdDm3bgIAtkz3pgYUxDw+m3sB3s/2bIJJtokZarnK WQ3IznYeEPMLiGPjzvq06c1ZF8fKwFDGD91aII+X1+Y2KfiC/o3/WI9WSpOYn0QVXGtZ up8g==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnrH577G8U8L372vfApGC0LNxa1getE0tQg0V7HWWpkCJFb/XfenMtODySQ0oyyxKU5n94t
X-Received: by 10.14.203.70 with SMTP id e46mr36611497eeo.33.1384193075247; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 10:04:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.175.173.95] (524A14A4.cm-4-3a.dynamic.ziggo.nl. [82.74.20.164]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id y7sm65710613eea.5.2013.11.11.10.04.33 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 11 Nov 2013 10:04:34 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.0 \(1816\))
From: Teco Boot <teco@inf-net.nl>
In-Reply-To: <DBDD85B3-D1B8-4BEA-8E78-40E0D5A9819C@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2013 19:04:32 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <1CA101E8-D72D-4930-874E-87B58A2F11EE@inf-net.nl>
References: <72FB622921C13746AD6349E70A8D9F307D9192F7@EXC-MBX03.tsn.tno.nl> <CAK=bVC85XAXR3Zkwq+JwELF-dvgrKwbowWCvwvnjeVn7VStnbw@mail.gmail.com> <72FB622921C13746AD6349E70A8D9F307D9193CD@EXC-MBX03.tsn.tno.nl> <5A8A5085482DA84995F4E70F5093AB50268E6C@XCH-BLV-503.nw.nos.boeing.com> <B2BA430A-F4E6-4DED-A7BB-7282A22802B7@inf-net.nl> <D02397F1-9D1B-4B36-81D0-4585ACDBA34A@gmail.com> <5D184300-2D97-4EC1-8D91-76D4A79B2BDA@inf-net.nl> <DDAE98C5-520E-4F8F-9F9B-2AB9A15A70EF@cisco.com> <7AE67C0F-C4D3-432A-BD4F-F16EA4F06657@inf-net.nl> <DBDD85B3-D1B8-4BEA-8E78-40E0D5A9819C@cisco.com>
To: Stan Ratliff <sratliff@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1816)
Cc: "DLEP Research Group (manet-dlep-rg@ietf.org)" <manet-dlep-rg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [manet-dlep-rg] Resources TLV
X-BeenThere: manet-dlep-rg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: DLEP Radio Group <manet-dlep-rg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/manet-dlep-rg>, <mailto:manet-dlep-rg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/manet-dlep-rg>
List-Post: <mailto:manet-dlep-rg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:manet-dlep-rg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet-dlep-rg>, <mailto:manet-dlep-rg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2013 18:04:42 -0000

Op 11 nov. 2013, om 18:33 heeft Stan Ratliff (sratliff) <sratliff@cisco.com> het volgende geschreven:

> Teco, 
> 
> I'm opposed to putting Resources in yet another draft. Yes, I understand that you have an implementation. My company has sold units, and has them in the field, interoperating with other company's products. Stripping the Resources TLV makes them non-compliant. IMHO, that's not an option. 

Yes, IETF DLEP will not be compatible with your products.
IETF has no objective to be so.
You have to change your code anyway.


> 
> I'm not opposed to changing the text around the (now) optional Resources TLV, to make it more vague.

Agreed.


> I am opposed to removing it in its entirety. Hence, I detect that we are at deadlock. Other opinions, please?

There is no deadlock.


Teco