Re: [mpls] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply-10: (with COMMENT)

"George Swallow (swallow)" <> Wed, 30 September 2015 18:50 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0232B1A88FF; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 11:50:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.51
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.51 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sdilsPx-sgYC; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 11:50:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CA8B71A88FD; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 11:50:38 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;;; l=10529; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1443639038; x=1444848638; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=BRGuI9df9oZqIirnnw5y/yidoI3EX4v/Ohs8A4AvEMM=; b=a1GhMKUQfJSVDRvN1TPrPuOYozqayJu50IC3qSeDAo+HDg39NroN7Q18 PqssVyUiH4HO5alvfhoINIuSShqJNQsFrTenI78MkbOvZsZ/P+Jdg2Ydz HQi8rnXSkiZEvUvX+fkpR42umy9tftOOHpiLuTKTWrD2Do4/wtZnh5HDS M=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.17,613,1437436800"; d="scan'208,217";a="192761931"
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 30 Sep 2015 18:50:25 +0000
Received: from ( []) by (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t8UIoPZ8003881 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 30 Sep 2015 18:50:25 GMT
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 13:50:24 -0500
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 13:50:24 -0500
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 13:50:24 -0500
From: "George Swallow (swallow)" <>
To: Lizhong Jin <>, Stephen Farrell <>
Thread-Topic: Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply-10: (with COMMENT)
Thread-Index: AQHQ+32ha/1Y/DDqbkGPHL6C2zaJm55VjjWA///tLYA=
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 18:50:24 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_D2319C151226DCswallowciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <>
Cc: "" <>, draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply <>, The IESG <>, mpls-chairs <>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply-10: (with COMMENT)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 18:50:41 -0000

Lizhong, Stephen,

Perhaps less in more!

  Destination Address Offset: the offset in octets from the top-of-stack
  to the destination address entry.

Lizhong –

There are several places in the draft where the term "destination address” should be "destination address entry”

It would also be good to add a column to the table on page 6 indicating the size of each entry

Null              4

IPv4      8

IPv6    20


From: Lizhong Jin <<>>
Date: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 at 11:57 AM
To: Stephen Farrell <<>>
Cc: The IESG <<>>, mpls-chairs <<>>, draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply <<>>, "<>" <<>>
Subject: Re: Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply-10: (with COMMENT)

Hi Stephen,
See inline below. Thanks.


On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 8:43 PM, Stephen Farrell <<>> wrote:
Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-ping-relay-reply-10: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:


- 3.2: The description of the destination address offset isn't
clear to me. If this is some common thing in MPLS though, that's
fine. If not, maybe it'd be worth being clearer here.
(It does become clear later though, so this is a nit.)

[Lizhong] I read several times, and try to make it more clear as below:

Destination Address Offset: an offset (octets) to indicate the
      position of the Relayed Address Entry which is also the

      destination address of the Reply or Relayed Reply message.

      E.g., to point the first entry on the top of the Stack of

      Relayed Addresses will have offset of 0, and to point to

      the second entry will have offset of the length of the first entry.