Re: [mpls] nits and question on draft-ietf-mpls-spring-lsp-ping-02

"Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)" <cpignata@cisco.com> Sat, 11 February 2017 18:29 UTC

Return-Path: <cpignata@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 149EA12941A; Sat, 11 Feb 2017 10:29:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.521
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.521 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UbTqAmr50iW9; Sat, 11 Feb 2017 10:29:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-7.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-7.cisco.com [173.37.86.78]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 50F0C1293D6; Sat, 11 Feb 2017 10:29:41 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3628; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1486837781; x=1488047381; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=4Kup4leLQ+7/C3BapATwGHeCIMaWUCmtIX2fWbjjoiM=; b=Xne+tYtD/v+7hqQRkmhe6oF3vyr7KS45tOOIzdQNdGVHd+uXJK5NHrj/ GYip6isuLGLhLE+H6VP8YK6NyKC8/gMzvi9BfInPRm+5FLZvKnWHjg6+t ej8L4gXsBBkvXb5OumPOOpLH/l1OgR1NCjHvSqNfP8CyjgCEg5eymMRU9 M=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0A1AQDJVp9Y/5RdJa1eGQEBAQEBAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBBwEBAQEBgm9jYXgRB41akW6QKYUsggwshXYCgns/GAECAQEBAQEBAWIohGo?= =?us-ascii?q?GeRACAQgEOwcyFBECBA4FiWoOsgCLSQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARgFh?= =?us-ascii?q?kyCBQiCYogIgjEFlVSGHgGGboslkQWTFAEfOIEAURVOAYYxdYkqgQwBAQE?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.35,147,1484006400"; d="scan'208,217";a="205691334"
Received: from rcdn-core-12.cisco.com ([173.37.93.148]) by rcdn-iport-7.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 11 Feb 2017 18:29:40 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-015.cisco.com (xch-aln-015.cisco.com [173.36.7.25]) by rcdn-core-12.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v1BITeaD012300 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Sat, 11 Feb 2017 18:29:40 GMT
Received: from xch-aln-020.cisco.com (173.36.7.30) by XCH-ALN-015.cisco.com (173.36.7.25) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Sat, 11 Feb 2017 12:29:40 -0600
Received: from xch-aln-020.cisco.com ([173.36.7.30]) by XCH-ALN-020.cisco.com ([173.36.7.30]) with mapi id 15.00.1210.000; Sat, 11 Feb 2017 12:29:39 -0600
From: "Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)" <cpignata@cisco.com>
To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [mpls] nits and question on draft-ietf-mpls-spring-lsp-ping-02
Thread-Index: AQHShI3kjsva65kUME2RMyZZz5c3mqFkhRMA
Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2017 18:29:39 +0000
Message-ID: <D713341E-F21A-4632-BB1D-0880FF36C9EF@cisco.com>
References: <D4C4B5FD.9C23E%acee@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <D4C4B5FD.9C23E%acee@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.82.233.89]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_D713341EF21A4632BB1D0880FF36C9EFciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/1Xn-qwxo_h7Yor4jle1kjbUkkvs>
Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" <mpls-chairs@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-mpls-spring-lsp-ping@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-mpls-spring-lsp-ping@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mpls] nits and question on draft-ietf-mpls-spring-lsp-ping-02
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mpls/>
List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2017 18:29:43 -0000

Hi, Acee,

On Feb 11, 2017, at 12:40 PM, Acee Lindem (acee) <acee@cisco.com<mailto:acee@cisco.com>> wrote:

And a last question, should BGP-LS be in that registry?


I guess no until someone needs it?

BGP-LS has its own set of registries.

Thanks. Yes. The question is whether to have a BGP-LS value for the MPLS LSP Ping DDMAP protocol: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mpls-spring-lsp-ping-02#section-6

Thanks,

Carlos.