Re: [mpls] Poll for WG adoption for draft-pac-mpls-lsp-ping-tlvs-and-sub-tlvs-registry-02

"Andrew G. Malis" <agmalis@gmail.com> Wed, 15 May 2013 21:51 UTC

Return-Path: <agmalis@gmail.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 D637D11E80E3 for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 May 2013 14:51:47 -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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
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 HD8Q98NcRMDn for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 May 2013 14:51:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-x22c.google.com (mail-wi0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::22c]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 837F911E80E0 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 May 2013 14:51:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wi0-f172.google.com with SMTP id ey16so3638954wid.17 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 May 2013 14:51:45 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=s6+khECRNBpUF37wSBBIDKU6OYbtsA8M9jPVu+lRmIA=; b=fMquXifgvRXI+EtUYBF3cfBchy8z5ZZOVLholJDx834Phu4gMdfe+3StLdHk4lNffD TEEwXQBw5tYI/6Sz41C/QxssGla2rPAAipRQ+bfdAICxP43YJ5qVl9LpPvdXLy9l2Pn6 VcXVV5OVmkGDcV9/nkaij3cmTX2BZvVv9Db4/FlHUvD2VB62FNZNqnDGM3ZAKpi0xfdA GohQzRhbTBEgJeE5/kpNP8nBwSj0LEtOqwRNBwfIlh/5WEfUzhYad8b97QgvOT4cgfk0 P6+Tj4dSkXRCP1+WjJv71UsFxT5wYZbPWyVQOBwOpyG4zuRoKUAmKjZ9VBaUv0YgHQRs 7kFA==
X-Received: by 10.180.89.170 with SMTP id bp10mr18157600wib.26.1368654705331; Wed, 15 May 2013 14:51:45 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.217.79.138 with HTTP; Wed, 15 May 2013 14:51:25 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <2FE467D3673DCE409A84D67EC2F607BB0FA778AF@xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com>
References: <62CCD4C52ACDAD4481149BD5D8A72FD316C3ED09@CH1PRD0510MB355.namprd05.prod.outlook.com> <2FE467D3673DCE409A84D67EC2F607BB0FA778AF@xmb-rcd-x10.cisco.com>
From: "Andrew G. Malis" <agmalis@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 17:51:25 -0400
Message-ID: <CAA=duU3PufWhnvhAJxsXp7yTWoxyJ5cuQ9z0FBu9C9+vuT9MKg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "George Swallow (swallow)" <swallow@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="14dae9cc955088154004dcc8c192"
Cc: Ross Callon <rcallon@juniper.net>, "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, "mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org>, "draft-pac-mpls-lsp-ping-tlvs-and-sub-tlvs-registry@tools.ietf.org" <draft-pac-mpls-lsp-ping-tlvs-and-sub-tlvs-registry@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Poll for WG adoption for draft-pac-mpls-lsp-ping-tlvs-and-sub-tlvs-registry-02
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: Wed, 15 May 2013 21:51:48 -0000

I agree with George from a definition standpoint, I don't find the "TLVs
and sub-TLVs" table at
http://www.iana.org/assignments/mpls-lsp-ping-parameters/mpls-lsp-ping-parameters.xmldifficult
to follow at all. However, it would be interesting to hear from
implementers if they've had any difficulty implementing the TLVs and
sub-TLVs.

But at this point, with existing implementations, I think we need a REALLY
GOOD reason to change other than some people find the table confusing,
which seems to be the main justification in the draft.

Also, if the draft is adopted, it would be useful for it to have a link to
the IANA page in the references.

Cheers,
Andy



On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 11:26 AM, George Swallow (swallow) <
swallow@cisco.com> wrote:

>  With hat off.
>
>  No/do not support.
>
>  I believe that making a single sub-TLV space is going to lead to a lot
> of confusion in the future as to which sub-TLVs are used with which TLVs.
>  That is one will have to search through bunch of documents instead of
> seeing it clearly laid out in the registry.
>
>  Keeping the spaces separate for RSVP has worked well.  I really don't
> get what is preventing that here.
>
>  George
>
>   From: Ross Callon <rcallon@juniper.net>
> Date: Sunday, May 5, 2013 10:53 PM
> To: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, "
> draft-pac-mpls-lsp-ping-tlvs-and-sub-tlvs-registry@tools.ietf.org" <
> draft-pac-mpls-lsp-ping-tlvs-and-sub-tlvs-registry@tools.ietf.org>
> Cc: "mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org>
>
> Subject: [mpls] Poll for WG adoption for
> draft-pac-mpls-lsp-ping-tlvs-and-sub-tlvs-registry-02
>
>   Working group,
>
> this is to start a "two week" poll on adopting
> draft-pac-mpls-lsp-ping-tlvs-and-sub-tlvs-registry-02
> as an MPLS working group document.
>
> Please send your comments (support/not support) to the mpls working
> group mailing list (*mpls@ietf.org* <mpls@ietf.org>).
>
> This poll will end May 20th, 2013.
>
> Ross
> (as mpls wg co-chair)
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mpls mailing list
> mpls@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
>
>