[mpls-tp] RFC 3209
Mahesh Akula <mahesh.akula36@gmail.com> Fri, 10 December 2010 23:00 UTC
Return-Path: <mahesh.akula36@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 1BD3D28C16C for <mpls-tp@core3.amsl.com>;
Fri, 10 Dec 2010 15:00:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 pD2XJv7FXjja for
<mpls-tp@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 15:00:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ww0-f42.google.com (mail-ww0-f42.google.com
[74.125.82.42]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2D7028C0F3 for
<mpls-tp@ietf.org>; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 15:00:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: by wwi17 with SMTP id 17so1520460wwi.1 for <mpls-tp@ietf.org>;
Fri, 10 Dec 2010 15:02:29 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:date:message-id
:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=L/ChzdBhtrdjJpNnoEDbTOaSqofSKpJUvi0mP09Z0hM=;
b=RGeHHg7D2wqL/pFJ3lnQ36+NSpIOUzcUCIj8WwTMr/cCXEzv8GOM/CPLaKH0+m2bzH
LlUHOzz3ThflaYabGlX7Mp5atjt5ctG+UxVIDvCakiWUbC5x4O3jd2uE1vijIuLj0Ml8
GmrRa7K6Dlruj2+7n86efxYK2iJuFIYraP2X8=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
b=nMlzDUNERrl06yAs9FlJrDt6xaWy5DIlv5RTbS376X+iOs+b/S8XRmlXQ2mNCfSTb0
Sr/c951r1XvpSMbRr2AkeqP+ELujAG1KC0mmuN7wpPooJi/tl0aqdRm1+Bm3GDBtFSw7
dv0YJtrJ4zQCzcRUpxxWBECzrNLc4Kjjn7Noo=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.216.162.198 with SMTP id y48mr1549920wek.94.1292022149474;
Fri, 10 Dec 2010 15:02:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.216.60.196 with HTTP; Fri, 10 Dec 2010 15:02:29 -0800 (PST)
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 15:02:29 -0800
Message-ID: <AANLkTik_yczZ4vHJHxj1Q0oBBBT7A7JXqvhGp0Qzf1Yx@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mahesh Akula <mahesh.akula36@gmail.com>
To: mpls-tp@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016364267df42eb8604971659e3
Subject: [mpls-tp] RFC 3209
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: Fri, 10 Dec 2010 23:00:59 -0000
Hi, As per RFC 3209, below is the defination of loose node. The path between a loose node and its preceding node MAY include other network nodes that are not part of the *strict *node or its preceding abstract node. Is it correct? or is the text supposed to be The path between a loose node and its preceding node MAY include other network nodes that are not part of the *loose* node or its preceding abstract node. Regards, Mahesh
- [mpls-tp] RFC 3209 Mahesh Akula