IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mpls] Comment on draft-fbb-mpls-gach-adv

Stewart Bryant <stbryant@cisco.com> Mon, 22 October 2012 14:58 UTC

Return-Path: <stbryant@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 3A5E921F8C1F for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Oct 2012 07:58:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.566
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.566 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.033, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TjMGYehl+6Zz for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Oct 2012 07:58:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ams-iport-1.cisco.com (ams-iport-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.140]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59C6E21F8C21 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Oct 2012 07:58:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2189; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1350917901; x=1352127501; h=message-id:date:from:reply-to:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=f2zM1Z7TzAcAPiUoZIgVzS9X1uDIDxz1La/mPFP3qFM=; b=RooDVOIix9b5RaHDEqd0r0yfyg/ob21jQ1OpX7psttk5CtH9Sg+GdKyu 6qOJardUMDr/TeZnVyZE6yQ+JBhWB86YzvuL/tz7zZZcxBAj5NiPOdcUO mTEDjTHk1/Ra9RjpJD9rVEa3B2Uy2BQWDiRywfjFI4/vpJvOrHZ7xFRwI g=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgEFAKxdhVCQ/khR/2dsb2JhbABFhhS6fIEIgiABAQEDAQEBAQ8BAg4VNgsFCQILGAICBSECAg8CCgwwBg0BBQIBAR6HXAYLnBODThCJQ5I6BIEcij+FXYESA5VxhWSIaoEGZYJwgWI
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,630,1344211200"; d="scan'208";a="145633845"
Received: from ams-core-1.cisco.com ([144.254.72.81]) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 22 Oct 2012 14:58:19 +0000
Received: from cisco.com (mrwint.cisco.com [64.103.70.36]) by ams-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q9MEwJmH017541 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 22 Oct 2012 14:58:19 GMT
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cisco.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id q9MEwF7N005614; Mon, 22 Oct 2012 15:58:16 +0100 (BST)
Message-ID: <50855F07.90708@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 15:58:15 +0100
From: Stewart Bryant <stbryant@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121010 Thunderbird/16.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Sriganesh Kini <sriganesh.kini@ericsson.com>
References: <CAOndX-suz1rxie-jyhHVvw0BLUM7pbqJvSuZQeYgfhLKJwkwPA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOndX-suz1rxie-jyhHVvw0BLUM7pbqJvSuZQeYgfhLKJwkwPA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Ross Callon <rcallon@juniper.net>, mpls@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [mpls] Comment on draft-fbb-mpls-gach-adv
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: stbryant@cisco.com
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 14:58:22 -0000

On 06/01/2012 00:15, Sriganesh Kini wrote:
> Hi Dan and other authors,
>
> Some comments
> 1. Is there an equivalent of 'Promiscous ARP' in GAP ?
Yes, this runs on the m/c address, so an application request for
the Ethernet address would have this functionality.
> 2. The semantics of the 'Message Identifier' should be explained.
Now in version -03
> 3. In sec 5.1, instead of "... Protocol message transmission SHALL
> operate on a per-.." can we use "... Protocol instance SHOULD operate
> on a per-...".
I am not sure how this works other than over the channel?
> 4. In sec 5.1, instead of per-data-channel it would be better to use
> "per Interface (or section)".
You could operate this over any LSP or PW including the null LSP, and
channel seems to cover that.

> 5. If IP is used in G-ACh but IP is not used in the data plane, is GAP
> still required ?
GAP is an announcement protocol. If you wish to announce something
you will need a protocol to do that, even if you carry it over say UDP/IP.

We have not considered the UDP/IP case in this draft, but if you have an
application for that you may wish to write such a draft.

- Stewart
>
> Thanks
>
> On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 3:24 AM, Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu> wrote:
>> Working Group,
>>
>> this is to start a two week poll to see if there is support to make
>>    draft-fbb-mpls-gach-adv-01
>>    draft-fbb-mpls-tp-ethernet-addressing-01
>> mpls working group drafts.
>>
>> Pleased send your comments to the mpls working group mailing list
>> (mpls@ietf.org).
>>
>> This poll ends January 18, 2012!
>>
>> Loa
>> for the mpls wg chairs
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> Loa Andersson                         email: loa.andersson@ericsson.com
>> Sr Strategy and Standards Manager            loa@pi.nu
>> Ericsson Inc                          phone: +46 10 717 52 13
>>                                              +46 767 72 92 13
>> _______________________________________________
>> mpls mailing list
>> mpls@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
>
>


-- 
For corporate legal information go to:

http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email