Re: [mpls] Progressing Resdience Time Measurement draft

"Acee Lindem (acee)" <> Sun, 31 January 2016 12:50 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 193E81A8AB9 for <>; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 04:50:56 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.502
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.502 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id z-ohw_1M68ou for <>; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 04:50:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 17F561A88FC for <>; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 04:50:53 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;;; l=4278; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1454244654; x=1455454254; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=sc4ojcuTEoB4VTHF8txQRGaLcgVkBVy84nMJAhH+nwI=; b=QzkR7Hn1y7a7tZ2rSjllTQeAXn/9rG94E3RFJemFx55jc2QSItdHaMyb bfGWxL4u3DbulqLHd0kx+jKlHD/U3ACojMNLgN50yP2vh7EX9dxEPKq6e kkmJ9sEaNqwgGfLqLY0GXdoV1q4VtDaNoN8gS3N4NzeEbGab65CxxctUh s=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,375,1449532800"; d="scan'208";a="623921716"
Received: from (HELO ([]) by with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 31 Jan 2016 12:50:51 +0000
Received: from ( []) by (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u0VCoo5Z015854 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Sun, 31 Jan 2016 12:50:51 GMT
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 07:50:49 -0500
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Sun, 31 Jan 2016 07:50:49 -0500
From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <>
To: Gregory Mirsky <>, Loa Andersson <>
Thread-Topic: [mpls] Progressing Resdience Time Measurement draft
Thread-Index: AQHRWi+i4aCoaj+USzqP2deJ9ymVRJ8U2EGwgAC/YoA=
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2016 12:50:49 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <>
Cc: "" <>, "" <>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Progressing Resdience Time Measurement draft
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: Sun, 31 Jan 2016 12:50:56 -0000

Hi Greg, 
That sounds like a good plan.

On 1/30/16, 8:36 PM, "Gregory Mirsky" <> wrote:

>Hi Acee,
>thank you for your thorough review and OSPF insights.
>I've updated reference to RFC 7684 in the new -01 version.
>When we were starting work on RTM we intended to address LDP signaled
>IP/MPLS networks as well and that, as I recall, was the reason to use
>more generic IGP TLVs rather than TE-specific. Since LDP drifted out of
>scope, I agree, use of TE advertisements is more suitable. We'll work on
>that and share new update with you and the IGP WGs.
>	Regards,
>		Greg
>-----Original Message-----
>From: mpls [] On Behalf Of Acee Lindem (acee)
>Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2016 4:55 PM
>To: Loa Andersson
>Subject: Re: [mpls] Progressing Resdience Time Measurement draft
>I’ve read the subject draft and think it offers a useful function to
>facilitate more accurate time synchronization in NTP/PTP deployments. One
>question I have is why the capability is signaled in the generic IGP TLV
>LSAs and LSPs rather than the TE advertisements when the document is
>scoped to RSVP-TE [RFC3209] LSPs? One reason I ask is that we are waiting
>on implementations of the OSPFv3 Extended LSAs draft. Having said that,
>OSPFv2 and OSPFv3 have separate registry for the TLV LSAs and section 8
>should reflect this. Also, OSPF Prefix/Link Attributes is now RFC 7684.
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Loa Andersson []
>>Sent: Monday, December 14, 2015 7:23 PM
>>To: Gregory Mirsky;;
>>Subject: Re: [mpls] Progressing Resdience Time Measurement draft
>>Working Group and authors, <chair hat off> As a matter of fact I
>>believe this document should be progressed.
>><chair hat on>
>>This draft has been a working group document since early August, but
>>there has been no discussion on the document on the wg mailing list.
>>There are of course two ways if interpreting this.
>>- there is total agreement on the draft
>>- there is no intrest in the draft
>>I have no basis to decide which is the case.
>>Can we plese have at least a few (non-author) comments on the mailing
>>list if it is time to start the wglc.
>>mpls wg co-chair
>>On 2015-12-15 07:21, Gregory Mirsky wrote:
>>Dear Chairs of the MPLS WG,
>>>authors of the Residence Time Measurement in MPLS Network draft
>>>believe that all comments received during the WG adoption call been
>>>Thus, authors would like to ask the WG Chairs to consider WG LC as the
>>>next step.
>>>                 Regards,
>>>                                 Greg
>>>mpls mailing list
>mpls mailing list