Re: [mpls] Question on draft-ietf-mpls-rfc4379bis-09.txt

["Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Tom,

Indeed. My reply implied (although it didn't spell out) that this is specified for the DDMAP (and not the deprecated DSMAP). That's why the protocol field definition happens in a sub-TLV. 

Let us make the changes in the doc and then we can discuss over something more concrete. 

Thanks!

Thumb typed by Carlos Pignataro.
Excuze typofraphicak errows

> On Nov 29, 2016, at 05:51, t.petch <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Carlos
> 
> One other point I raised was that spring-lsp refers throughout to
> Downstream Mapping TLV
> and not to
> Downstream Detailed Mapping TLV
> 
> Mustapha assumed that these should all be changed.  I am unsure about
> this - is spring-lsp expected to work with Downstream Mapping TLV as
> specified in RFC4379?  If not, then I think that spring-lsp should spell
> that out.
> 
> Either way, the wording changes to spring-lsp need some thought since
> Downstream Mapping TLV does not have subTLVs and Downstream Detailed
> Mapping TLV does.
> 
> Tom Petch
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)" <[e-mail]>
> To: "Aissaoui, Mustapha (Nokia - CA)" <[e-mail]>
> Cc: <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 1:53 PM
> 
>> Thank you Mustapha for catching these, and Tom and Mach for the
> follow-ups.
>> 
>> There are three changes needed to draft-ietf-mpls-spring-lsp-ping
> based based on this discussion:
>> 
>> 
>>  1.  In Section 10.1, update the references to {Section 4.1, Section
> 4.2, Section 4.1} -> {Section 5.1, Section 5.2, Section 5.1}
>>  2.  Create a Section 10.2, create a registry for the “Protocol field
> of the Label Stack Sub-TLV of the Downstream Detailed Mapping TLV”,
> registering values 0-4, and asking for TBD5 and TBD6. If this happens in
> this draft instead of 4379bis, I believe it is OK.
>>  3.  Create a Section 10.3, requesting error code TBD.
>> 
>> Thanks!
>> 
>> ―
>> Carlos Pignataro, [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
>> 
>> “Sometimes I use big words that I do not fully understand, to make
> myself sound more photosynthesis."
>> 
>> On Nov 24, 2016, at 5:05 PM, Aissaoui, Mustapha (Nokia - CA)
> <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>> 
>> Dear all,
>> Can someone point me to where are held the IANA allocation for the
> values in the ‘protocol’ field of the Label Stack Sub-TLV of the
> Downstream Detailed Mapping TLV?
>> 
>> There is draft-ietf-mpls-spring-lsp-ping-01 which is adding IS-IS and
> OSPF as new values into this field but I fail to find where these are
> maintained.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Mustapha.
>