IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Pce] 答复: My Comment on draft-lee-pce-flexible-grid

Zhenghaomian <zhenghaomian@huawei.com> Thu, 20 July 2017 09:05 UTC

Return-Path: <zhenghaomian@huawei.com>
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 6D45C12ECCB; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 02:05:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.222
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.222 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 ANu5o_IFWety; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 02:05:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 18972127735; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 02:05:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml705-cah.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id DKX16683; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 09:05:11 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from DGGEML404-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.17.39) by lhreml705-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.46) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.301.0; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:04:31 +0100
Received: from DGGEML503-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.9.230]) by DGGEML404-HUB.china.huawei.com ([fe80::b177:a243:7a69:5ab8%31]) with mapi id 14.03.0301.000; Thu, 20 Jul 2017 17:04:20 +0800
From: Zhenghaomian <zhenghaomian@huawei.com>
To: Leeyoung <leeyoung@huawei.com>, Julien Meuric <julien.meuric@orange.com>, "pce@ietf.org" <pce@ietf.org>, "draft-lee-pce-flexible-grid@ietf.org" <draft-lee-pce-flexible-grid@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: My Comment on draft-lee-pce-flexible-grid
Thread-Index: AQHTATIlZrAh6H0eF0iN1/0Eyg5vhaJb32SAgACIoRA=
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 09:04:20 +0000
Message-ID: <E0C26CAA2504C84093A49B2CAC3261A43A29D4B3@DGGEML503-MBX.china.huawei.com>
References: <4c3a734a-d04c-937b-5273-35c8f04f8179@orange.com> <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E172B3EEB1C@SJCEML702-CHM.china.huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <7AEB3D6833318045B4AE71C2C87E8E172B3EEB1C@SJCEML702-CHM.china.huawei.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.210.171.12]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A090203.59707247.0064, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=169.254.9.230, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: a7804800fddf1df4b23fee5b5e009aec
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pce/sSt_bY1-Ml3jLZuRGaJHTiW0Clw>
Subject: [Pce] 答复: My Comment on draft-lee-pce-flexible-grid
X-BeenThere: pce@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 09:05:15 -0000

Hi, Julien and Young, 

I fully agree on that we should try our best on reusing the existing object/TLVs. FYI, when we are working on GMPLS extensions from fixed-grid (WSON) to flexi-grid, we have some TLVs in parallel (switching types) for fixed/flexi-grid. 

I assume this is exactly what we are doing in this draft, the split occurs when it is difficult to use existing TLV to represent the new features. In some cases, the meaning of flags/TLVs need to be changed to support different scenarios, so the similarity on object does not necessarily mean the equivalent on functionality. 

My 2 cents, 
Haomian

-----邮件原件-----
发件人: Pce [mailto:pce-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 Leeyoung
发送时间: 2017年7月20日 16:41
收件人: Julien Meuric; pce@ietf.org; draft-lee-pce-flexible-grid@ietf.org
主题: Re: [Pce] My Comment on draft-lee-pce-flexible-grid

Hi Julien,

I agree. A New flag on the object header (WA Object, I assume that is what you are pointing to) where we have a flag to indicate if this is fixed (WSON) or flexi-grid is reasonable instead of creating a new object for a new Spectrum Assignment Object.

TLVs require a bit different encoding due to the nature of additional parameters for flexi-grid. So strict re-use of WSON TLV may not be sufficient for some cases in flexi-grid. 

Best regards,
Young

-----Original Message-----
From: Julien Meuric [mailto:julien.meuric@orange.com] 
Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2017 10:28 AM
To: pce@ietf.org; draft-lee-pce-flexible-grid@ietf.org
Subject: My Comment on draft-lee-pce-flexible-grid

Hi,

The discussion during the meeting suggests that I need to clarify my comment about draft-lee-pce-flexible-grid.

This I-D is very similar to draft-ietf-pce-wson-rwa-ext, which addresses the exact same problem over a slightly different WDM label space (running a side-by-side diff between them appears to be very practical).
This new I-D requests the creation of one object and 3 TLVs, which are identical to the ones created in the WSON.
As a result, I believe the latter should be reused as a starting popint.
Covering the flexi-grid case may just need to allocate new flag in the object header to identify the WDM type we're dealing with, and document the flexi-grid-specific assumptions (if any).

Thanks,

Julien

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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email