[mpls] R: PSC: draft-rhd-mpls-tp-psc-priority-00

D'Alessandro Alessandro Gerardo <alessandro.dalessandro@telecomitalia.it> Tue, 07 May 2013 19:27 UTC

Return-Path: <alessandro.dalessandro@telecomitalia.it>
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 918D421F908B for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 May 2013 12:27:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.881
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.881 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HELO_EQ_IT=0.635, HOST_EQ_IT=1.245, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 3krbbeyAo2Jl for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 May 2013 12:26:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from GRFEDG701RM001.telecomitalia.it (grfedg701rm001.telecomitalia.it [217.169.121.20]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DF2E21F905F for <mpls@ietf.org>; Tue, 7 May 2013 12:26:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from TELCAH004RM001.telecomitalia.local (10.19.10.108) by GRFEDG701RM001.telecomitalia.it (10.173.88.20) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.297.1; Tue, 7 May 2013 21:26:56 +0200
Received: from TELMBB002RM001.telecomitalia.local ([169.254.3.100]) by TELCAH004RM001.telecomitalia.local ([10.19.10.108]) with mapi id 14.02.0328.009; Tue, 7 May 2013 21:26:56 +0200
From: D'Alessandro Alessandro Gerardo <alessandro.dalessandro@telecomitalia.it>
To: "Eric Osborne (eosborne)" <eosborne@cisco.com>, "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: PSC: draft-rhd-mpls-tp-psc-priority-00
Thread-Index: Ac47ZD1tB/jb+CaKQqOehjxMIOgzIgP835SQ
Date: Tue, 07 May 2013 19:26:55 +0000
Message-ID: <22257C41A415324A984CD03D63344E270A4750F7@TELMBB002RM001.telecomitalia.local>
References: <20ECF67871905846A80F77F8F4A2757210150296@xmb-rcd-x09.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <20ECF67871905846A80F77F8F4A2757210150296@xmb-rcd-x09.cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: it-IT
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.19.10.81]
x-ti-disclaimer: Disclaimer1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: Morro Roberto <roberto.morro@telecomitalia.it>, Allasia Andrea <andrea.allasia@telecomitalia.it>, Nervo Giacolino <giacolino.nervo@telecomitalia.it>
Subject: [mpls] R: PSC: draft-rhd-mpls-tp-psc-priority-00
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <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: Tue, 07 May 2013 19:27:02 -0000

Hi Eric,
You wrote "is it appropriate to make this priority swap?"
My answer is yes, it shall be done for the reasons explained in liaison 1205, bullet 1.

You wrote "- what do we need to change?  rfc5654?  rfc4427?  "
No I don't believe it is required to change any RFC but RFC 6378

Best regards,
Alessandro

------------------------------------------------------------------
Telecom Italia
Alessandro Gerardo D'Alessandro
Transport Innovation
Via Reiss Romoli, 274 - 10148 Torino
phone:  +39 011 228 5887
mobile: +39 335 766 9607
fax: +39 06 418 639 07


-----Messaggio originale-----
Da: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] Per conto di Eric Osborne (eosborne)
Inviato: mercoledì 17 aprile 2013 14:16
A: mpls@ietf.org
Oggetto: [mpls] PSC: draft-rhd-mpls-tp-psc-priority-00

This thread is for discussing draft-rhd-mpls-tp-psc-priority-00.  In brief, the draft proposes swapping the priorities between FS and SF-P (see section 4.3.2 of rfc6378).  This proposed swap has a long history, dating back to when PSC was an ID.  For some history, see

http://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/1229/
and
http://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/1234/

The questions that I think are relevant here are:

- is it appropriate to make this priority swap?
  - are there alternative approaches?
  - what do we need to change?  rfc5654?  rfc4427?
- if we don't make the change, does this expose implementation to problems?
- if we do make the change, how do we go about it?

but of course any and all discussion is welcome.

As with the other threads I'm going to leave my two cents out of this introductory email but I'll chime in when discussion starts.





eric
_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls

Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie.

This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks.