IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mpls] Retiring ACH TLVs

"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Mon, 20 May 2013 16:42 UTC

Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
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 8516321F9644 for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 May 2013 09:42:24 -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 ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ITJes4ialh3p for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 May 2013 09:42:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (asmtp1.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.248]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 743A821F9636 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 May 2013 09:42:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r4KGgGVv029290; Mon, 20 May 2013 17:42:16 +0100
Received: from 950129200 (dsl-sp-81-140-15-32.in-addr.broadbandscope.com [81.140.15.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r4KGgFPT029275 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 20 May 2013 17:42:16 +0100
From: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: 'Yaakov Stein' <yaakov_s@rad.com>
References: <002a01ce4b45$82e38ae0$88aaa0a0$@olddog.co.uk> <07F7D7DED63154409F13298786A2ADC904D3032A@EXRAD5.ad.rad.co.il>
In-Reply-To: <07F7D7DED63154409F13298786A2ADC904D3032A@EXRAD5.ad.rad.co.il>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2013 17:42:14 +0100
Message-ID: <025101ce5578$fc510e10$f4f32a30$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQLV0SBduuCV8Bbr8Ga6vxHiyLN4SAGga88vlvJKfHA=
Content-Language: en-gb
Cc: mpls@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [mpls] Retiring ACH TLVs
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
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, 20 May 2013 16:42:24 -0000

Yaakov,

> However, I believe that options for the signalling and management channels of
> RFC 5718 have never been spelled out.  Are we sure that these will not need
> some standard modifiers/parameters ?

It's a reasonable question, and perhaps why the TLV space was initially defined.
The example use cases I have seen discussed have been addresses and security.

However, we have got this far without any actual use cases which makes me think
that "standard modifiers/parameters" will not be applied to all of the existing
ACH types (essentially they had the "No TLVs" box checked in the registry). 

So, I think the way it works is that if one or more new ACH types need
"standard" modifiers in their messages, they can build that information into the
messages they define rather than into the generic header that is the ACH.

Cheers,
Adrian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email