Re: [mpls] Last Call: <draft-ietf-mpls-spl-terminology-03.txt> (Special Purpose Label terminology) to Informational RFC

Hi Tom,

You're right (a condition that must be scarily familiar for you).

Probably...

OLD
   o  Collectively, the two ranges are known as Special Purpose Labels
      (SPL).

   o  The special purpose labels from the lower range will be called
      Base Special Purpose Labels (bSPL).

   o  The special purpose labels from the higher range will be called
      Extended Special Purpose Labels (eSPL).
NEW
   o  Collectively, the two ranges (0-15, and 16-1048575) are known
       as Special Purpose Labels (SPL).

   o  The special purpose labels from the lower range (0-15) will be
       called Base Special Purpose Labels (bSPL).

   o  The special purpose labels from the higher range (16-1048575)
        will be called Extended Special Purpose Labels (eSPL).  The
        reserved values 0-15 from the 'Extended Special-Purpose MPLS
        Label Values' registry do not need a name as they can never be
        used.
END

Best,
Adrian

-----Original Message-----
From: tom petch <daedulus@btconnect.com> 
Sent: 19 August 2020 17:25
To: last-call@ietf.org
Cc: mpls@ietf.org; draft-ietf-mpls-spl-terminology@ietf.org; db3546@att.com;
mpls-chairs@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-mpls-spl-terminology-03.txt> (Special
Purpose Label terminology) to Informational RFC

I find this confusing.

It specifies two ranges 0-15 and 0-1048575 the latter being subdivided 
into ranges 0-15 16-239 etc and then talks of the lower range and the 
higher range; is the higher range 0-1048575 or 16-239 or 16-1048575 or ...?
Lesser and greater or first and second or smaller and larger .. I might 
find unambiguous but reading this with an innocent eye, I find higher 
ambiguous.

And in Security, 'It does not effect the forwarding ...' Well, no, it 
would likely not affect it either:-)

Tom Petch

On 12/08/2020 19:48, The IESG wrote:
>
> The IESG has received a request from the Multiprotocol Label Switching WG
> (mpls) to consider the following document: - 'Special Purpose Label
> terminology'
>    <draft-ietf-mpls-spl-terminology-03.txt> as Informational RFC
>
> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final
> comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
> last-call@ietf.org mailing lists by 2020-08-26. Exceptionally, comments
may
> be sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the
beginning
> of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
>
> Abstract
>
>
>     This document discusses and recommends a terminology that may be used
>     when MPLS Special Purpose Labels (SPL) are specified and documented.
>
>     This document updates RFC 7274 and RFC 3032.
>
>
>
>
> The file can be obtained via
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-spl-terminology/
>
>
>
> No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> IETF-Announce mailing list
> IETF-Announce@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
> .
>