Re: [mpls] *** Revised ID needed *** Last Call: draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps (ALink-Type sub-TLV to convey the number of Traffic EngineeringLabel Switched Paths signalled with zero reserved bandwidthacross a link) to Propose

JP Vasseur <jvasseur@cisco.com> Tue, 19 August 2008 17:53 UTC

Return-Path: <mpls-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: mpls-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-mpls-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB4073A6D48; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 10:53:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65FB63A6D43; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 10:53:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.35
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.35 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.148, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Iy9Vw2zKZ1Yr; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 10:53:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rtp-iport-1.cisco.com (rtp-iport-1.cisco.com [64.102.122.148]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF2A03A6D4B; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 10:53:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.32,236,1217808000"; d="scan'208,217"; a="18106249"
Received: from rtp-dkim-2.cisco.com ([64.102.121.159]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 19 Aug 2008 17:52:58 +0000
Received: from rtp-core-1.cisco.com (rtp-core-1.cisco.com [64.102.124.12]) by rtp-dkim-2.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m7JHqwRe021202; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:52:58 -0400
Received: from xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-201.cisco.com [64.102.31.12]) by rtp-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m7JHqwFB003014; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:52:58 GMT
Received: from xmb-rtp-213.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.112]) by xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:52:58 -0400
Received: from 10.61.65.79 ([10.61.65.79]) by xmb-rtp-213.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.112]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:52:58 +0000
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.12.0.080729
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 19:52:56 +0200
From: JP Vasseur <jvasseur@cisco.com>
To: isis-wg@ietf.org
Message-ID: <C4D0D518.4F3F3%jvasseur@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: *** Revised ID needed *** Last Call: draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps (ALink-Type sub-TLV to convey the number of Traffic EngineeringLabel Switched Paths signalled with zero reserved bandwidthacross a link) to Propose
Thread-Index: AckCI5tWSTj5+jnWRUi7LrNoD2vV6AAAM2ir
In-Reply-To: <C4D0D3BF.4F3E2%jvasseur@cisco.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Aug 2008 17:52:58.0480 (UTC) FILETIME=[6A737700:01C90224]
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=8188; t=1219168378; x=1220032378; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim2001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=jvasseur@cisco.com; z=From:=20JP=20Vasseur=20<jvasseur@cisco.com> |Subject:=20Re=3A=20***=20Revised=20ID=20needed=20***=20Las t=20Call=3A=0A=20draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps=20(ALin k-Type=20sub-TLV=20to=20convey=20the=20number=0A=20of=20Traf fic=20EngineeringLabel=20Switched=20Paths=20signalled=20with =20zero=20reserved=0A=20bandwidthacross=20a=20link)=20to=20P ropose |Sender:=20 |To:=20<isis-wg@ietf.org>; bh=EZ2cJOdeHLIPyS3yKa42TFQozEvqckN8Sfos+j0/42s=; b=lKaUyNn3IZD9WBaPkOe0guE9RTfd9TFxjMHJJ7FHEHPETC9Vc0oIkt2UAj QXxSjx/T8/o4IWutfJIewFunBtknEmr2Uy78j3Q6WaDyvf4EcRh2aHo7AVqa wESvwimWqF;
Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-2; header.From=jvasseur@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/rtpdkim2001 verified; );
Cc: mpls@ietf.org, David Ward <dward@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [mpls] *** Revised ID needed *** Last Call: draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps (ALink-Type sub-TLV to convey the number of Traffic EngineeringLabel Switched Paths signalled with zero reserved bandwidthacross a link) to Propose
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/private/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>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0249799691=="
Sender: mpls-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: mpls-bounces@ietf.org

On 8/19/08 7:47 PM, "JP Vasseur" <jvasseur@cisco.com> wrote:

> Dear WGs,
> 
> We just posted the new revision of draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps:
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-number-0-bw-te-lsps-11.txt
> 
> The changes takes into account the comment received during WG LCs and are
> summarized below:
>>> 
>>>>>  
>>>>>  Here are some comments from various lists that I can find on the ISIS
>>>>> aspects:
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>>  -----------------------------------
>>>>>  "Section 1:
>>>>>  
>>>>>  s/Constraint/Constrained
>>>>>  
>>>>>  Section 2 Paragraph 3 First Sentence
>>>>>  
>>>>>  s/assumption/assumptions
>>>>>  
>>>>>  s/unconstrained TE Label Switched Path/unconstrained TE Label Switched
>>>>>  Paths
>>>>>  (plural "paths")
>>>>>  
>>>>>  JP> Fixed.
>>>>>  
>>>>>  Section 3
>>>>>  
>>>>>  As the section is discussing two different sub-TLVs (one for IS-IS and
>>>>>  one for OSPF) the first sentence should read:
>>>>>  
>>>>>  "Two Unconstrained TE LSP count sub-TLVs are defined that specify the
>>>>>     number of TE LSPs signalled with zero bandwidth across a link.
>>>>>  
>>>>>  JP> Fixed.
>>>>>  
>>>>>  Section 3.1
>>>>>  
>>>>>  It might be worth mentioning that the new sub-TLV could also appear in
>>>>>  the MT IS-Neighbor TLV (222) - but I won't insist on it as it is
>>>>>  generally assumed that anything that appears in TLV 22 could also appear
>>>>>  in TLV 222.
>>>>>  "
>>>>>  JP> OK I added a reference.
>>>>>  ---------------------------------------
>>>>>  
>>>>>  "
>>>>>  if a link flaps and a substantial number of tunnels are going through
>>>>>  it, these tunnels will be re-routed through other links. This will
>>>>>  trigger flooding of isis lsp's in order to advertise/update the
>>>>>  te-lsp-count subtlv, right ? Do we need to specify anything in order to
>>>>>  prevent storms ?
>>>>>  "
>>>>>  
>>>>>  This last one is relevant to be addressed w/ some modified text in the
>>>>> draft. More to come as I get it.
>>>>>  
>>>>>  JP> Which is no different than for any other TE-related TLVs. Even with
>>>>> non-0 bw TE LSPs, if a link flaps they will get rerouted on other links,
>>>>> which will change the reserved bandwidth and will trigger the flooding of
>>>>> ISIS LSP or OSPF LSA to reflect the updated reserved bandwidth ? This is
>>>>> why we added ³Similarly to other MPLS Traffic Engineering link
>>>>> characteristics, LSA/LSP origination trigger mechanisms are outside the
>>>>> scope of this document.²
>>>>>  
>>>>>  That being said, I added the following : ³care must be given to not
>>>>> trigger the systematic flooding of a new IS-IS LSP or OSPF LSA with a too
>>>>> high granularity in case of change of the number of unconstrained TE
>>>>> LSPs.²
>>>>>  
>>>>>  JP> Furthermore, I checked IANA actions, all correct.
>>>>>  
>>>>>  -Dward
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>> 
>>>>> JP.
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>>>>>  
>  

_______________________________________________
mpls mailing list
mpls@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls