IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mpls] working group last call ondraft-ietf-mpls-tp-mip-mep-map

Rolf Winter <Rolf.Winter@neclab.eu> Tue, 04 December 2012 08:46 UTC

Return-Path: <Rolf.Winter@neclab.eu>
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 DD98221F8605 for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Dec 2012 00:46:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.385
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.385 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.214, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id i4kk+QILxCe1 for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Dec 2012 00:46:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailer1.neclab.eu (mailer1.neclab.eu [195.37.70.40]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E059A21F845B for <mpls@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Dec 2012 00:46:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailer1.neclab.eu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E2C310282A; Tue, 4 Dec 2012 09:46:35 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: Amavisd on Debian GNU/Linux (netlab.nec.de)
Received: from mailer1.neclab.eu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (atlas-a.office.hd [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OKwkiWYhyS9z; Tue, 4 Dec 2012 09:46:35 +0100 (CET)
Received: from METHONE.office.hd (methone.office.hd [192.168.24.54]) by mailer1.neclab.eu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03859102828; Tue, 4 Dec 2012 09:46:15 +0100 (CET)
Received: from DAPHNIS.office.hd ([169.254.2.105]) by METHONE.office.hd ([192.168.24.54]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Tue, 4 Dec 2012 09:46:15 +0100
From: Rolf Winter <Rolf.Winter@neclab.eu>
To: Puneet Agarwal <pagarwal@broadcom.com>, "hideki.endo.es@hitachi.com" <hideki.endo.es@hitachi.com>
Thread-Topic: [mpls] working group last call ondraft-ietf-mpls-tp-mip-mep-map
Thread-Index: AQHN0eK+O4JEBXeB5UOt6q9GpTzxDZgIUb6Q
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2012 08:46:05 +0000
Message-ID: <791AD3077F94194BB2BDD13565B6295D55542A76@DAPHNIS.office.hd>
References: <5098CF68.2000105@pi.nu> <016e01cdc675$3b64d6b0$b22e8410$@olddog.co.uk> <4A6CE49E6084B141B15C0713B8993F281BD2E957@SJEXCHMB12.corp.ad.broa> <027c01cdc7c8$d5500430$7ff00c90$@olddog.co.uk> <F0E40950-2607-4AB5-BB17-88EFC41C1603@yahoo.com> <791AD3077F94194BB2BDD13565B6295D5552490A@Hydra.office.hd> <4A6CE49E6084B141B15C0713B8993F281BD2FBBB@SJEXCHMB12.corp.ad.broa> <38DFCE5F-A496-4AAC-A2C5-0450B5260EAD@broadcom.com> <CAGEmCZyDCBV-vdA96Amnx-08U-Xq_6t+mnF34k8o_8tX+4z2VQ@mail.gmail.c> <4A6CE49E6084B141B15C0713B8993F281BD338A7@SJEXCHMB12.corp.ad.broa> <791AD3077F94194BB2BDD13565B6295D555415E0@DAPHNIS.office.hd> <B5CDD7D1-CBD7-4E74-ADE6-0DEBE26E3757@broadcom.com> <791AD3077F94194BB2BDD13565B6295D55542847@DAPHNIS.office.hd> <4A6CE49E6084B141B15C0713B8993F281BD389A3@SJEXCHMB12.corp.ad.broa> <XNM1$7$0$0$$6$1$2$A$5003751U50bd483f@hitachi.com> <4A6CE49E6084B141B15C0713B8993F281BD38CA7@SJEXCHMB12.corp.ad.broa>, <XNM1$7$0$0$$6$1$2$A$5003753U50bd5093@hitachi.com> <28AF076D-2D85-4B79-8A7E-0C1AE39D01DC@broadcom.com>
In-Reply-To: <28AF076D-2D85-4B79-8A7E-0C1AE39D01DC@broadcom.com>
Accept-Language: en-US, de-DE
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.7.0.208]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [mpls] working group last call ondraft-ietf-mpls-tp-mip-mep-map
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: Tue, 04 Dec 2012 08:46:37 -0000

Hi,

quite some time ago we asked whether we could mandate TLV ordering (at least mandating one out of N TLVs to be the first in the OAM PDU) in order to allow efficient implementation in HW. This actually would be a good thing in this case. The responses we got weren't quite positive (which is actually quite a positive description of the responses we got) but I don't see that the GACh RFC is actually disallowing it. Still we would need to go back and make changes to a few RFCs. That was also something people weren't really happy about. Again, these were some of the constraints we worked with which led to what is on the table right now. We weren't blind to HW considerations, vice versa as you can see when you look at the appendix that was removed in the latest version of the document.

Best,

Rolf

NEC Europe Limited | Registered Office: NEC House, 1 Victoria Road, London W3 6BL | Registered in England 2832014 


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Puneet Agarwal [mailto:pagarwal@broadcom.com]
> Sent: Dienstag, 4. Dezember 2012 06:44
> To: hideki.endo.es@hitachi.com
> Cc: Shahram Davari; Rolf Winter; mpls@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [mpls] working group last call ondraft-ietf-mpls-tp-mip-
> mep-map
> 
> Hi hideki,
> 
> Is the determination that the mip identifier is present in the same
> location  always in the pdu or is it variable (based on oam msg type)?
> 
> Thx
> 
> Puneet
> 
> 
> 
> On Dec 3, 2012, at 5:24 PM, "hideki.endo.es@hitachi.com"
> <hideki.endo.es@hitachi.com> wrote:
> 
> > draft-ietf-mpls-tp-mip-mep-map

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email