Re: [mpls] Retiring ACH TLVs

"Shahram Davari" <davari@broadcom.com> Tue, 14 May 2013 17:04 UTC

Return-Path: <davari@broadcom.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 90C6B21F8F53 for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 May 2013 10:04:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 irrprYf4N0yO for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 May 2013 10:04:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mms1.broadcom.com (mms1.broadcom.com [216.31.210.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B70621F91F1 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 May 2013 10:03:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.9.208.53] by mms1.broadcom.com with ESMTP (Broadcom SMTP Relay (Email Firewall v6.5)); Tue, 14 May 2013 10:00:00 -0700
X-Server-Uuid: 06151B78-6688-425E-9DE2-57CB27892261
Received: from SJEXCHCAS07.corp.ad.broadcom.com (10.16.203.16) by IRVEXCHCAS06.corp.ad.broadcom.com (10.9.208.53) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.438.0; Tue, 14 May 2013 10:03:34 -0700
Received: from SJEXCHMB12.corp.ad.broadcom.com ( [fe80::bc15:c1e1:c29a:36f7]) by SJEXCHCAS07.corp.ad.broadcom.com ( [::1]) with mapi id 14.01.0438.000; Tue, 14 May 2013 10:03:33 -0700
From: Shahram Davari <davari@broadcom.com>
To: "George Swallow (swallow)" <swallow@cisco.com>, Sam Aldrin <aldrin.ietf@gmail.com>, "adrian@olddog.co.uk" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
Thread-Topic: [mpls] Retiring ACH TLVs
Thread-Index: Ac5LRX560irUVDlgRIKUWSY/7OcnkAEuhUCAADzDeQAAC2zZcA==
Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 17:03:32 +0000
Message-ID: <4A6CE49E6084B141B15C0713B8993F281BDF32DC@SJEXCHMB12.corp.ad.broadcom.com>
References: <12BA262D-8402-4E44-B806-F40B8F868642@gmail.com> <2FE467D3673DCE409A84D67EC2F607BB0FA778F0@xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <2FE467D3673DCE409A84D67EC2F607BB0FA778F0@xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.16.203.100]
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-WSS-ID: 7D8CB21A31W19257230-01-01
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "<mpls@ietf.org>" <mpls@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Retiring ACH TLVs
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, 14 May 2013 17:04:19 -0000

Support.

Thx
SD

-----Original Message-----
From: mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of George Swallow (swallow)
Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2013 8:30 AM
To: Sam Aldrin; adrian@olddog.co.uk
Cc: <mpls@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Retiring ACH TLVs

Absolutely!

On 5/13/13 6:30 AM, "Sam Aldrin" <aldrin.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:

>Fully support.
>
>-sam
>
>Sent from my iPhone
>
>On May 7, 2013, at 1:08 PM, "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> 
>> ACH TLVs keep popping up and causing Stewart and me trouble. Mainly it
>>is about explaining why no-one actually wants to use them (i.e., when
>>each new ACH Type is defined and has a "No TLVs" written for it, we get
>>asked "why not?").
>> 
>> It seems to us that ACH TLVs are an idea that has been rejected.
>>Initially we thought they might be used (especially for identifiers),
>>but there seems to be good opinion that handling generic TLVs would be a
>>pain.
>> 
>> Since I was heavily responsible for insisting that ACH TLVs were
>>included in RFC 5586, it seems reasonable that I do the work to fix it.
>> 
>> The I-D below retires ACH TLVs and handles the necessary registry
>>changes.
>> 
>> Note, of course, that structured data are still possible within
>>individual ACHs if the protocol spec for an individual ACH decides to
>>have them.
>> 
>> We're directing this work to the MPLS working group because that is
>>where 5586 was written. I have BCC'ed PWE3, L2VPN, and BFD for
>>information. 
>> 
>> Thanks for any comments.
>> 
>> As humble WG contributors we would be enthusiastic to see early WG
>>adoption and last call :-)
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Adrian
>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: internet-drafts@ietf.org [mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org]
>>> Sent: 07 May 2013 17:33
>>> To: Adrian Farrel; Stewart Bryant
>>> Subject: New Version Notification for
>>>draft-farbryantrel-mpls-retire-ach-tlv-
>>> 00.txt
>>> 
>>> 
>>> A new version of I-D, draft-farbryantrel-mpls-retire-ach-tlv-00.txt
>>> has been successfully submitted by Adrian Farrel and posted to the
>>> IETF repository.
>>> 
>>> Filename:     draft-farbryantrel-mpls-retire-ach-tlv
>>> Revision:     00
>>> Title:         Retiring TLVs from the Associated Channel Header of the
>>>MPLS
>>> Generic Associated Channel
>>> Creation date:     2013-05-07
>>> Group:         Individual Submission
>>> Number of pages: 4
>>> URL:           
>>>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-farbryantrel-mpls-retire-
>>> ach-tlv-00.txt
>>> Status:        
>>>http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-farbryantrel-mpls-retire-ach-tlv
>>> Htmlized:      
>>>http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-farbryantrel-mpls-retire-ach-tlv-00
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Abstract:
>>>   The MPLS Generic Associated Channel (G-ACh) is a generalization of
>>>   the applicability of the Pseudowire (PW) Associated Channel Header
>>>   (ACH).  RFC 5586 defines the concept of Type-Length-Variable (TLV)
>>>   constructs that can be carried in messages on the G-ACh by placing
>>>   them in the ACH.
>>> 
>>>   No Associated Channel Type yet defined uses a TLV.  Furthermore, it
>>>   is believed that handling TLVs in hardware introduces significant
>>>   problems to the fast-path, and since G-ACh messages are intended to
>>>   be processed substantially in hardware, the use of TLVs in
>>>   undesirable.
>>> 
>>>   This document updates RFC 5586 by retiring ACH TLVs and removing the
>>>   associated registry.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> The IETF Secretariat
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> mpls mailing list
>> mpls@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
>_______________________________________________
>mpls mailing list
>mpls@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls

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