Re: [mpls-tp] Proposed liaison to ITU-T on G.8110

"Andrew G. Malis" <agmalis@gmail.com> Mon, 28 June 2010 21:21 UTC

Return-Path: <agmalis@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: mpls-tp@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls-tp@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EEB53A69E7 for <mpls-tp@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 28 Jun 2010 14:21:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HxStAL8Cj+fA for <mpls-tp@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 28 Jun 2010 14:20:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-gx0-f172.google.com (mail-gx0-f172.google.com [209.85.161.172]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF3503A6A72 for <mpls-tp@ietf.org>; Mon, 28 Jun 2010 14:20:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by gxk5 with SMTP id 5so431582gxk.31 for <mpls-tp@ietf.org>; Mon, 28 Jun 2010 14:21:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:mime-version:received:in-reply-to :references:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=GidQ6+9vBicg+uy+lSSabw10550H85/flI/m3NRDYJU=; b=hKE98fxnlYtiY4gW+KqJgy+fBav12CE3JPvHTU9M4LqP8Rvj+VEnQgToj63LBn2Oem gQliq399ZkLnvuieWI8MZxZTMpCMwmSAeq1amZh4La6R7EoKyggvbEsY0GyT38X8vdrr gX3PiBmDiiWILgehhzG//MSd3okxt9/ltqrk0=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=FpOmeHjGhrkRVMQGR+kAze3ARfUABukXKyfH5D2AzAWqNhAaiobNL9PJQXPPYnw5rX nNV0Uk0L0sve4/A9lnMRfflDUaABdHBZY9VrLK+0JC5RPT57l4nvUqDknnNzQGWpsaO7 EdDnPn41pk2VNmGFeWUrKUX/F7xuMV+xTKT+M=
Received: by 10.101.11.20 with SMTP id o20mr7022237ani.4.1277760063235; Mon, 28 Jun 2010 14:21:03 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.100.6.12 with HTTP; Mon, 28 Jun 2010 14:20:43 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4C28DF03.7020103@cisco.com>
References: <4C28DF03.7020103@cisco.com>
From: "Andrew G. Malis" <agmalis@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 17:20:43 -0400
Message-ID: <AANLkTinXv8B1bqYSRww1nDyrDVrWsKWfAi8OtBzoOQt0@mail.gmail.com>
To: stbryant@cisco.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "mpls-tp@ietf.org" <mpls-tp@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mpls-tp] Proposed liaison to ITU-T on G.8110
X-BeenThere: mpls-tp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: MPLS-TP Mailing list <mpls-tp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls-tp>, <mailto:mpls-tp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mpls-tp>
List-Post: <mailto:mpls-tp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mpls-tp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls-tp>, <mailto:mpls-tp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2010 21:21:00 -0000

Stewart,

That seems like a very reasonable liaison.

Cheers,
Andy

On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 1:42 PM, Stewart Bryant <stbryant@cisco.com> wrote:
>
> Several people have pointed out a discrepancy in the model for MPLS as
> documented in G.8110. Since this formal model plays a major role in the
>  ITU-T MPLS-TP G.8110.1 specification, the error should to be corrected
> before publication.
>
> I therefore propose that we send the following liaison to the ITU-T.
>
> - Stewart
>
> ===============
>
> To: ITU-T WP3/15
> From: IETF
>
> Dear Dr. Trowbridge,
>
> We note that G.8110 is referenced as a normative reference from the draft
> text of the revision of G.8110.1. We also note that G.8110 is
> now five years old, and has received no contributions for update over that
> period. G.8110 has been described as "not covering all of MPLS and certainly
> not what has happened in the last five years."
>
> We believe that G.8110.1 should document MPLS-TP accurately. It is
> important, therefore, that where the model for MPLS-TP differs from that
> described in G.8110, the correct model be developed and documented in
> G.8110.1.
>
> We would like to draw your attention in specifically to Section 6.2.2 of
> G.8110 (and, in particular, Figures 1 and 2) that says that the Time-To-Live
> (TTL) field of an MPLS header is part of the Characteristic Information (CI)
> of an MPLS_CI traffic unit. We note that according to G.805, the CI is
> supposed to be delivered end-to-end between MPLS APs without modification or
> inspection. But the function of a TTL in an MPLS-TP network is to be
> decremented at each hop along the path, and to be inspected at each hop and
> tested against zero. Thus, in the model for MPLS-TP, the TTL should not form
> part of the CI.
>
> We request that G.8110.1 be updated to include this revision to the model.
> This might most easily be achieved by augmenting the references to G.8110
> with updated figures based on those in G.8110 along with appropriate text
> explaining the differences in the model such that G.8110.1 correctly
> captures the model for MPLS-TP.
>
> ==========
> _______________________________________________
> mpls-tp mailing list
> mpls-tp@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls-tp
>