IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Pce] [pce] :New Version Notification for draft-xiong-pce-lsp-flag-00.txt

"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Mon, 02 December 2019 13:22 UTC

Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
X-Original-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pce@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A35E4120273 for <pce@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Dec 2019 05:22:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.597
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.597 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ALfCFYOgolWt for <pce@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Dec 2019 05:21:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mta5.iomartmail.com (mta5.iomartmail.com [62.128.193.155]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3221812006D for <pce@ietf.org>; Mon, 2 Dec 2019 05:21:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from vs3.iomartmail.com (vs3.iomartmail.com [10.12.10.124]) by mta5.iomartmail.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id xB2DLtgj029919; Mon, 2 Dec 2019 13:21:56 GMT
Received: from vs3.iomartmail.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EC752203D; Mon, 2 Dec 2019 13:21:53 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (unknown [10.12.10.249]) by vs3.iomartmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 199F72203C; Mon, 2 Dec 2019 13:21:53 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from LAPTOPK7AS653V ([84.93.96.25]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id xB2DLpGf013887 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 2 Dec 2019 13:21:52 GMT
Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
From: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: 'Dhruv Dhody' <dhruv.ietf@gmail.com>, xiong.quan@zte.com.cn
Cc: "'Stone, Andrew (Nokia - CA/Ottawa)'" <andrew.stone@nokia.com>, 'Loa Andersson' <loa@pi.nu>, pce@ietf.org
References: <CAB75xn6DuwZFSk0KLQcotz0M0tMNsNTmWf5Sa3T0Bso4wg4e8g@mail.gmail.com> <201912020932468871773@zte.com.cn> <CAB75xn7fQA32i+E_qeCancJk8vfjyHEiEotq=xekBpUAfZN6Eg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAB75xn7fQA32i+E_qeCancJk8vfjyHEiEotq=xekBpUAfZN6Eg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2019 13:21:50 -0000
Organization: Old Dog Consulting
Message-ID: <07fc01d5a913$75b29bd0$6117d370$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Thread-Index: AQInA05uWRKgS1uwePjq0k/tiX+oZwJ8vPimArE/1H2m2rAKEA==
Content-Language: en-gb
X-Originating-IP: 84.93.96.25
X-Thinkmail-Auth: adrian@olddog.co.uk
X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSVA-9.0.0.1623-8.2.0.1013-25078.007
X-TM-AS-Result: No--7.539-10.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--7.539-10.0-31-10
X-TMASE-Version: IMSVA-9.0.0.1623-8.2.1013-25078.007
X-TMASE-Result: 10--7.539100-10.000000
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: 6otD/cJAac1or4mPA3EMtnFPUrVDm6jtiRPU6vvejXJPvOpmjDN2khT7 moX2uLUVvUkaVGuZI5Mgns2A4NkG5jQdOVb9/jgPbmjidFgcbNIZskwWqoib3KtkcxxU6EVIrqB Zsi2WkF0BcnpRtUvcH+C7bygUKEwVYlAr3AgnbbVswYo64ufkVfj4/bP3ORM3mbdPE3zcujh7XE gV3uEXzQpziWOou199vPGXoJaT4PN21zBthUokNThiciQR/+DQTIR/yqWMcrtYbPLopoBzQtxwX 69jh9hhFb6jOEcIcVr1ksjBX8R+8OwAaNLqXHEqwrUhv0kAAvF9LQinZ4QefBrZLyuS+0VxsOzO ncrmCoP3FLeZXNZS4DjAdLIal4R6oUj24xYrYIog2PeCGxCr28IVI2FuwVF7LYyke3hfnEYUAAw DJuM/8g==
X-TMASE-SNAP-Result: 1.821001.0001-0-1-12:0,22:0,33:0,34:0-0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/WxsaqXpjS0xAFZGzbUYweObXBVk>
Subject: Re: [Pce] [pce] :New Version Notification for draft-xiong-pce-lsp-flag-00.txt
X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Path Computation Element <pce.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pce>, <mailto:pce-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/pce/>
List-Post: <mailto:pce@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pce-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce>, <mailto:pce-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2019 13:22:02 -0000

Hi,

I wouldn't object to any solution.
- What Dhruv suggests
- Just 32 bits and define a new TLV if more bits are ever needed

Best,
Adrian

-----Original Message-----
From: Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.ietf@gmail.com> 
Sent: 02 December 2019 05:28
To: xiong.quan@zte.com.cn
Cc: Farrel Adrian <adrian@olddog.co.uk>; Stone, Andrew (Nokia - CA/Ottawa) <andrew.stone@nokia.com>; Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>; pce@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Pce] [pce] :New Version Notification for draft-xiong-pce-lsp-flag-00.txt

Hi Quan,

> But for the last issue, I am not sure if the length of 32 bits is good or not. If 32 bits is enough for the extensions of other I-Ds?
>
> What is your suggestion?

I can think of one case: PCE capability flags in [1], where we defined
it as an array of units of 32-bit flags   numbered from the most
significant as bit zero, where  each bit represents one flag. In the
corresponding IANA registry [2], we maintained it as 32 bits for now,
which can be easily updated by a future document when needed.

As a WG contributor, I think it is better to be future proof even
though 32 bits seems good enough at the present.

Thanks!
Dhruv


[1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5088#section-4.5
[2] https://www.iana.org/assignments/ospfv2-parameters/ospfv2-parameters.xhtml#ospfv2-parameters-14

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email