Re: [PWE3] [mpls] WG LC draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal-in-pw-00.txt
Curtis Villamizar <curtis@occnc.com> Wed, 23 March 2011 20:24 UTC
Return-Path: <curtis@occnc.com>
X-Original-To: pwe3@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pwe3@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12AC328C0F1 for <pwe3@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Mar 2011 13:24:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 6fcB3HaT-NSJ for <pwe3@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Mar 2011 13:24:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from harbor.orleans.occnc.com (harbor.orleans.occnc.com [173.9.106.135]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BDDE3A68D5 for <pwe3@ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Mar 2011 13:24:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from harbor.orleans.occnc.com (harbor.orleans.occnc.com [173.9.106.135]) by harbor.orleans.occnc.com (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id p2NKPr2t076600; Wed, 23 Mar 2011 16:25:53 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from curtis@harbor.orleans.occnc.com)
Message-Id: <201103232025.p2NKPr2t076600@harbor.orleans.occnc.com>
To: stbryant@cisco.com
From: Curtis Villamizar <curtis@occnc.com>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 22 Mar 2011 18:00:07 -0000." <4D88E3A7.4040502@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 16:25:53 -0400
Sender: curtis@occnc.com
Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, "mpls-tp@ietf.org" <mpls-tp@ietf.org>, "lihan@chinamobile.com" <lihan@chinamobile.com>, pwe3 <pwe3@ietf.org>, HUANG Feng F <Feng.f.Huang@alcatel-sbell.com.cn>, Robert Rennison <Robert.Rennison@ecitele.com>
Subject: Re: [PWE3] [mpls] WG LC draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal-in-pw-00.txt
X-BeenThere: pwe3@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: curtis@occnc.com
List-Id: Pseudo Wires Edge to Edge <pwe3.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3>, <mailto:pwe3-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pwe3>
List-Post: <mailto:pwe3@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pwe3-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3>, <mailto:pwe3-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 20:24:26 -0000
In message <4D88E3A7.4040502@cisco.com> Stewart Bryant writes: > > If there is IETF consensus to update RFC5586 with this change then the > process is relatively simple: > > The document making the update notes that it does the update, and the AD > draws attention to > this in the IETF LC. > > Stewart Stewart, The restriction that GAL be at the bottom of stack was simply a mistake IMHO. I stated that during MPLS WG discussion before it became an RFC but it went through as is anyway with that restriction. Even then it was said that if there were a strong reason to relax it that it could be considered later. That time may have come. There are a number of reasons that labels might want to go below GAL, including to use OAM to diagnose the connectivity (or lack of) that is experienced only for a specific label stack combinations where multipath (link bundle, LAG, less applicable is ECMP in this case) is used. In this case though, the GAL under the LSP label currently indicates that after the POP that OAM needs to be done (or more accurately that a G-Ach of some type is being carried). If the GAL is put above the PW label it is in that same place and there is an ambiguity. It is an ambiguity that for some but not all defined OAM can be resolved by looking at information in BFD that makes it unambiguous. Unless I'm mistaken, in CC/CV the label stack above GAL provides the context. Another solution would be to put GAL under the PW label. It would probably be best to put GAL under PW but over the fat-pw label. The PW implementation, seeing the PW was not BOS, could look at the next label to see if the label is reserved and specifically if it is GAL, and if not process as payload (unless CW is also used). If CW was not used the only advantage is 4 bytes less in payload but the same size in OAM packets. This is an advantage though. On a related topic, if we must put ELI plus entropy label on the stack we have saved nothing relative to fat-pw plus CW. ELI as a termination of hash search may have other uses though (MPLS-TP). I would be in favor of a very short draft just relaxing the requirement that GAL be at the bottom of stack, independent of the reason for doing so, since a number of reasons have emerged. The behavior would be to throw away the rest of the label stack when the GAL label is exposed and look at the MPLS payload interpreting it as an G-Ach channel (most often, but not exclusively, as OAM). This relaxation of the BOS restriction would be independent of usage. Curtis > On 22/03/2011 16:22, Robert Rennison wrote: > > > > Luca, Thomas, > > > > A couple of clarification questions. > > > > I'm trying to understand what the combination of the two drafts, > > -lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal-in-pw, and draft-nadeau-pwe3-vccv-2amounts to. > > > > So, I think I understood the draft-nadeau-pwe3-vccv-2 in that it's > > saying use VCCV type 1 where possible and if not then use the new type > > 4, whereby in type 4 the exception mechanism is triggered by the use > > of the GAL, and I appreciated the diagram in section 3 to lock this > > is, so far so good. > > > > Now I read -pwe3-mpls-tp-gal-in-pw and I'm thinking , Ok these two > > drafts could work together since this one is trying to lay the "legal > > framework" i.e fix up the RFCs which mandated that the GAL could not > > be used with the PW. > > > > Then I get hit with a brick wall in the form of the statements in the > > last 2 paras of section 3 of tp-gal-in-pw which state. > > > > - Section 4.2 > > <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal-in-pw-00#section-4.2>. > > (GAL Applicability and Usage) in [RFC5586 > > <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5586>], the > > > > original text: > > > > In MPLS-TP, the GAL MUST be used with packets on a G-ACh on > > > > LSPs, Concatenated Segments of LSPs, and with Sections, and > > > > MUST NOT be used with PWs. It MUST always be at the bottom of > > > > the label stack (i.e., S bit set to 1). However, in other MPLS > > > > environments, this document places no restrictions on where > > > > the GAL may appear within the label stack or its use with PWs. > > > > is replaced by: > > > > In MPLS-TP, the GAL MUST be used with packets on a G-ACh on > > > > LSPs, Concatenated Segments of LSPs, and with Sections, and > > > > MAY be used with PWs. It MUST always be at the bottom of the > > > > label stack (i.e., S bit set to 1). However, in other MPLS > > > > environments, this document places no restrictions on where > > > > the GAL may appear within the label stack. > > > > It's the bit about the GAL MUST be at the bottom of the label stack, > > this is clearly inconsistent with what is proposed in the > > draft-nadeau-pwe3 where one can clearly see the GAL above the PW label > > and if one has to use a GAL with a PW this would be the place to put it, > > > > Now I can hear you saying "oh but look at the text below this, where > > we state .."However, in other MPLS environments , this document places > > no restrictions on where the GAL may appear within the label stack. > > This is consistent with draft-nadeau " In which case I'd retort with > > ; what are we to do for PWs in MPLS-TP, since what's in draft-nadeau > > would not be allowed ? > > > > Clarification /explanation appreciated. > > > > Cheers > > > > Rob Rennison > > > > *From:*mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf > > Of *Alexander Vainshtein > > *Sent:* Friday, March 11, 2011 2:22 PM > > *To:* Greg Mirsky; Luca Martini > > *Cc:* lihan@chinamobile.com; mpls-tp@ietf.org; pwe3; HUANG Feng F; > > mpls@ietf.org > > *Subject:* Re: [mpls] WG LC draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal-in-pw-00.txt > > > > Greg, Luca, > > > > As I've already stated in my comment on draft-nadeau-pwe3-vccv-2, IMHO > > it makes draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal-in-pw completely useless. > > > > My 2c, > > > > Sasha > > > > *From:*mpls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf > > Of *Greg Mirsky > > *Sent:* Friday, March 11, 2011 9:14 PM > > *To:* Luca Martini > > *Cc:* lihan@chinamobile.com; mpls@ietf.org; pwe3; HUANG Feng F; > > mpls-tp@ietf.org > > *Subject:* Re: [mpls] WG LC draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal-in-pw-00.txt > > > > Dear Luca, > > thank you for bringing draft-nadeau-pwe3-vccv-2-01 to my attention. > > I'll send my comments to it in a separate e-mail. > > I'll have to miss another opportunity to discuss your proposal in a > > meeting. Please add my comments below to my earlier expressed WG LC > > comments: > > > > * the draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal-in-pw-00 depends on any solution > > that addresses applicability of GAL in PW VCCV, e.g. solution > > proposed in draft-nadeau-pwe3-vccv-2-01; > > * the draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal-in-pw-00 needs to mention such > > dependency and refer to any existing proposal; > > * I believe that the draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal-in-pw-00 can be > > advanced in lock with document that addresses use of GAL in PW VCCV. > > > > Regards, > > Greg > > > > On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 5:31 AM, Luca Martini <lmartini@cisco.com > > <mailto:lmartini@cisco.com>> wrote: > > > > Greg , > > Some > > > > > > On 02/18/11 11:15, Greg Mirsky wrote: > > > Dear Luca, > > > I see at least two issues: > > > > > > * use of GAL for PW, in my view, is another VCCV CC type that has > > > to be negotiated as described in RFC 5085. > > > > > > > These are valid points, but this document in question does not define, > > not discussed VCCV. > > We have since posted a draft that proposes a new VCCV mode , and we > > welcome comments regarding that document. > > (draft-nadeau-pwe3-vccv-2-01.txt) > > > > > * use of GAL creates ambiguous situation when PW CW is used. The > > > > > benefit from extending GAL in PW, as I see, is for PWs that are > > > not required to use PW CW. That might be a good enough reason to > > > update RFC 5586 as proposed in the document but we must address > > > use cases of GAL in PWs that require presence PW CW. If we > > > prohibit or even discourage use of GAL for these PWs that have > > > PW VCCV as native Associated Channel, then architecture of ACh > > > for MPLS-TP PW not simplified as result of adopting the proposal. > > > > > > Regard > > > > Greg, > > The GAL is basically a notifier that the packet following the end of the > > MPLS label stack, is explicitly defined as a G-ACH format. > > Normally the packet would be decoded as an IP packet , unless the last > > label on the stack indicated otherwise. > > > > The GAL can certainly be applied to a PW OAM packet on a PW that uses > > the CW, and this document does not define that , nor restricts it. > > > > The scope of this document is limited to removing an unnecessary > > restriction in rfc5586, hence this comment not applicable to this > > document. > > > > Thanks. > > Luca > > > > > > > s, > > > Greg > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 7:46 AM, Luca Martini <lmartini@cisco.com > > <mailto:lmartini@cisco.com> > > > > > <mailto:lmartini@cisco.com <mailto:lmartini@cisco.com>>> wrote: > > > > > > Greg, > > > > > > Sorry, but I do not remember the point you mention. > > > Can you explain again here ? > > > Thanks. > > > Luca > > > > > > > > > On 02/17/11 23:47, Greg Mirsky wrote: > > > > Dear Authors and All, > > > > prior to the meeting in Bejing and acceptance of this proposal as WG > > > > document Luca and I agreed that use of GAL with PW VCCV presents a > > > > problem. > > > > I was not attending the IETF-79, nor I found discussion of this > > > issue > > > > in the minutes. I think that this issue should be specified, > > > > explained. In my view, this document updates not only RFC 5586 > > > > but RFC 5085 too. > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Greg > > > > > > > > Comment to draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal-in-pw-00.txt > > > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 10:14 AM, Luca Martini > > > <lmartini@cisco.com <mailto:lmartini@cisco.com> > > <mailto:lmartini@cisco.com <mailto:lmartini@cisco.com>> > > > > > > <mailto:lmartini@cisco.com <mailto:lmartini@cisco.com> > > <mailto:lmartini@cisco.com <mailto:lmartini@cisco.com>>>> wrote: > > > > > > > > Greg, > > > > > > > > You are correct , the proposed update does not propose any > > > changes > > > > to VCCV. > > > > However the problem with vccv is not as simple as to ask for > > > a new > > > > code point from IANA. > > > > Given the good amount of discussion on this point, we should > > > > probably have a discussion in Beijing. > > > > > > > > Luca > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 10/29/2010 05:07 PM, Greg Mirsky wrote: > > > >> Dear Authors, > > > >> I think that proposed update of the Section 4.2. RFC 5586 > > > makes it possible > > > >> to use GAL on MPLS-TP PW that uses Control Word. I consider > > > it to be > > > >> conflict between PW VCCV CC types because use of GAL is not > > > negotiated > > > >> through PW VCCV negotiation. To avoid such situation I propose: > > > >> > > > >> - in Section 5 request IANA to assign new CC Type "MPLS > > > Generic > > > >> Associated Channel Label" > > > >> - assign precedence to new CC Type that affects Section > > > 7 RFC 5085 > > > >> > > > >> Regards, > > > >> Greg > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> _______________________________________________ > > > >> mpls mailing list > > > > > >> mpls@ietf.org <mailto:mpls@ietf.org> <mailto:mpls@ietf.org > > <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>> <mailto:mpls@ietf.org <mailto:mpls@ietf.org> > > > > > <mailto:mpls@ietf.org <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>>> > > > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > mpls mailing list > > > > mpls@ietf.org <mailto:mpls@ietf.org> <mailto:mpls@ietf.org > > <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>> > > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > mpls mailing list > > mpls@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > > -- > For corporate legal information go to: > > http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html > > > > --------------050303000603040509070000 > Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> > <html> > <head> > <meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1" > http-equiv="Content-Type"> > </head> > <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff"> > If there is IETF consensus to update RFC5586 with this change then > the process is relatively simple:<br> > <br> > The document making the update notes that it does the update, and > the AD draws attention to<br> > this in the IETF LC.<br> > <br> > Stewart<br> > <br> > <br> > <br> > On 22/03/2011 16:22, Robert Rennison wrote: > <blockquote > cite="mid:786AD2EC3D80A1428B921CDC9BE9EE546569F9F8E1@USPITMAIL01.ecitele.com" > type="cite"> > <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; > charset=ISO-8859-1"> > <meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered > medium)"> > <style><!-- > /* Font Definitions */ > @font-face > {font-family:"Cambria Math"; > panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;} > @font-face > {font-family:Calibri; > panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;} > @font-face > {font-family:Tahoma; > panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;} > /* Style Definitions */ > p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal > {margin:0in; > margin-bottom:.0001pt; > font-size:12.0pt; > font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";} > a:link, span.MsoHyperlink > {mso-style-priority:99; > color:blue; > text-decoration:underline;} > a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed > {mso-style-priority:99; > color:purple; > text-decoration:underline;} > pre > {mso-style-priority:99; > mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char"; > margin:0in; > margin-bottom:.0001pt; > font-size:10.0pt; > font-family:"Courier New";} > span.EmailStyle17 > {mso-style-type:personal; > font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; > color:#1F497D;} > span.EmailStyle18 > {mso-style-type:personal-reply; > font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; > color:#1F497D;} > span.HTMLPreformattedChar > {mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char"; > mso-style-priority:99; > mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted"; > font-family:"Courier New";} > .MsoChpDefault > {mso-style-type:export-only; > font-size:10.0pt;} > @page WordSection1 > {size:8.5in 11.0in; > margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;} > div.WordSection1 > {page:WordSection1;} > /* List Definitions */ > @list l0 > {mso-list-id:1278948757; > mso-list-template-ids:-1227977334;} > @list l0:level1 > {mso-level-number-format:bullet; > mso-level-text:\F0B7; > mso-level-tab-stop:.5in; > mso-level-number-position:left; > text-indent:-.25in; > mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; > font-family:Symbol;} > @list l1 > {mso-list-id:1800680213; > mso-list-template-ids:-512447670;} > @list l1:level1 > {mso-level-number-format:bullet; > mso-level-text:\F0B7; > mso-level-tab-stop:.5in; > mso-level-number-position:left; > text-indent:-.25in; > mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; > font-family:Symbol;} > @list l1:level2 > {mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in; > mso-level-number-position:left; > text-indent:-.25in;} > @list l1:level3 > {mso-level-tab-stop:1.5in; > mso-level-number-position:left; > text-indent:-.25in;} > @list l1:level4 > {mso-level-tab-stop:2.0in; > mso-level-number-position:left; > text-indent:-.25in;} > @list l1:level5 > {mso-level-tab-stop:2.5in; > mso-level-number-position:left; > text-indent:-.25in;} > @list l1:level6 > {mso-level-tab-stop:3.0in; > mso-level-number-position:left; > text-indent:-.25in;} > @list l1:level7 > {mso-level-tab-stop:3.5in; > mso-level-number-position:left; > text-indent:-.25in;} > @list l1:level8 > {mso-level-tab-stop:4.0in; > mso-level-number-position:left; > text-indent:-.25in;} > @list l1:level9 > {mso-level-tab-stop:4.5in; > mso-level-number-position:left; > text-indent:-.25in;} > ol > {margin-bottom:0in;} > ul > {margin-bottom:0in;} > --></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> > <o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" /> > </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> > <o:shapelayout v:ext="edit"> > <o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" /> > </o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--> > <div class="WordSection1"> > <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: > "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, > 73, 125);">Luca, Thomas,<o:p></o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: > "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, > 73, 125);"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: > "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, > 73, 125);">A couple of clarification questions.<o:p></o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: > "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, > 73, 125);"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: > "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, > 73, 125);">I’m trying to understand what the combination of > the two drafts, </span><span style="font-size: 11pt; > font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; > color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal-in-pw, and > draft-nadeau-pwe3-vccv-2</span><span style="font-size: 11pt; > font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; > color: rgb(31, 73, 125);"> amounts to.<o:p></o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: > "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, > 73, 125);"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: > "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, > 73, 125);">So, I think I understood the </span><span > style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: > "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, > 73, 125);">draft-nadeau-pwe3-vccv-2 in that it’s saying use > VCCV type 1 where possible and if not then use the new type > 4, whereby in type 4 the exception mechanism is triggered > by the use of the GAL, and I appreciated the diagram in > section 3 to lock this is, so far so good.<o:p></o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: > "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, > 73, 125);"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: > "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, > 73, 125);">Now I read -pwe3-mpls-tp-gal-in-pw and I’m > thinking , Ok these two drafts could work together since > this one is trying to lay the “legal framework” i.e fix up > the RFCs which mandated that the GAL could not be used with > the PW. <o:p></o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: > "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, > 73, 125);"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: > "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, > 73, 125);">Then I get hit with a brick wall in the form of > the statements in the last 2 paras of section 3 of > tp-gal-in-pw which state.<o:p></o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: > "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, > 73, 125);"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal" style="page-break-before: always;"><span > style="font-family: "Courier New"; color: black;">- > <a moz-do-not-send="true" > href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal-in-pw-00#section-4.2">Section > 4.2</a>. (GAL Applicability and Usage) in [<a > moz-do-not-send="true" > href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5586" > title=""MPLS Generic Associated Channel"">RFC5586</a>], > the<o:p></o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal" style="page-break-before: always;"><span > style="font-family: "Courier New"; color: black;"> > original text:<o:p></o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal" style="page-break-before: always;"><span > style="font-family: "Courier New"; color: black;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal" style="page-break-before: always;"><span > style="font-family: "Courier New"; color: black;"> > In MPLS-TP, the GAL MUST be used with packets on a G-ACh on<o:p></o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal" style="page-break-before: always;"><span > style="font-family: "Courier New"; color: black;"> > LSPs, Concatenated Segments of LSPs, and with Sections, and<o:p></o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal" style="page-break-before: always;"><span > style="font-family: "Courier New"; color: black;"> > MUST NOT be used with PWs. It MUST always be at the bottom > of<o:p></o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal" style="page-break-before: always;"><span > style="font-family: "Courier New"; color: black;"> > the label stack (i.e., S bit set to 1). However, in other > MPLS<o:p></o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal" style="page-break-before: always;"><span > style="font-family: "Courier New"; color: black;"> > environments, this document places no restrictions on where<o:p></o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal" style="page-break-before: always;"><span > style="font-family: "Courier New"; color: black;"> > the GAL may appear within the label stack or its use with > PWs.<o:p></o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal" style="page-break-before: always;"><span > style="font-family: "Courier New"; color: black;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal" style="page-break-before: always;"><span > style="font-family: "Courier New"; color: black;"> > is replaced by:<o:p></o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal" style="page-break-before: always;"><span > style="font-family: "Courier New"; color: black;"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal" style="page-break-before: always;"><span > style="font-family: "Courier New"; color: black;"> > In MPLS-TP, the GAL MUST be used with packets on a G-ACh on<o:p></o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal" style="page-break-before: always;"><span > style="font-family: "Courier New"; color: black;"> > LSPs, Concatenated Segments of LSPs, and with Sections, and<o:p></o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal" style="page-break-before: always;"><span > style="font-family: "Courier New"; color: black;"> > MAY be used with PWs. It MUST always be at the bottom of the<o:p></o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal" style="page-break-before: always;"><span > style="font-family: "Courier New"; color: black;"> > label stack (i.e., S bit set to 1). However, in other MPLS<o:p></o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal" style="page-break-before: always;"><span > style="font-family: "Courier New"; color: black;"> > environments, this document places no restrictions on where<o:p></o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal" style="page-break-before: always;"><span > style="font-family: "Courier New"; color: black;"> > the GAL may appear within the label stack.<o:p></o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: > "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, > 73, 125);"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: > "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, > 73, 125);"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: > "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, > 73, 125);">It’s the bit about the GAL MUST be at the bottom > of the label stack, this is clearly inconsistent with what > is proposed in the draft-nadeau-pwe3 where one can clearly > see the GAL above the PW label and if one has to use a GAL > with a PW this would be the place to put it,<o:p></o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: > "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, > 73, 125);"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: > "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, > 73, 125);">Now I can hear you saying “oh but look at the > text below this, where we state ..”However, in other MPLS > environments , this document places no restrictions on where > the GAL may appear within the label stack. This is > consistent with draft-nadeau “ In which case I’d retort > with ; what are we to do for PWs in MPLS-TP, since what’s > in draft-nadeau would not be allowed ?<o:p></o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: > "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, > 73, 125);"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: > "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, > 73, 125);">Clarification /explanation appreciated. <o:p></o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: > "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, > 73, 125);"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: > "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, > 73, 125);">Cheers<o:p></o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: > "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, > 73, 125);"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: > "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, > 73, 125);">Rob Rennison<o:p></o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: > "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, > 73, 125);"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: > "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, > 73, 125);"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> > <div> > <div style="border-right: medium none; border-width: 1pt > medium medium; border-style: solid none none; border-color: > rgb(181, 196, 223) -moz-use-text-color -moz-use-text-color; > padding: 3pt 0in 0in;"> > <p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size: 10pt; > font-family: > "Tahoma","sans-serif";">From:</span></b><span > style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: > "Tahoma","sans-serif";"> > <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org">mpls-bounces@ietf.org</a> [<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org">mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org</a>] <b>On > Behalf Of </b>Alexander Vainshtein<br> > <b>Sent:</b> Friday, March 11, 2011 2:22 PM<br> > <b>To:</b> Greg Mirsky; Luca Martini<br> > <b>Cc:</b> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:lihan@chinamobile.com">lihan@chinamobile.com</a>; <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:mpls-tp@ietf.org">mpls-tp@ietf.org</a>; > pwe3; HUANG Feng F; <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:mpls@ietf.org">mpls@ietf.org</a><br> > <b>Subject:</b> Re: [mpls] WG LC > draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal-in-pw-00.txt<o:p></o:p></span></p> > </div> > </div> > <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> > <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: > "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, > 73, 125);">Greg, Luca,<o:p></o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: > "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, > 73, 125);">As I’ve already stated in my comment on > draft-nadeau-pwe3-vccv-2, IMHO it makes > draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal-in-pw completely useless.<o:p></o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: > "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, > 73, 125);"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: > "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, > 73, 125);">My 2c,<o:p></o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: > "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, > 73, 125);"> Sasha<o:p></o:p></span></p> > <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: > "Calibri","sans-serif"; color: rgb(31, > 73, 125);"><o:p> </o:p></span></p> > <div style="border-width: medium medium medium 1.5pt; > border-style: none none none solid; border-color: > -moz-use-text-color -moz-use-text-color -moz-use-text-color > blue; padding: 0in 0in 0in 4pt;"> > <div> > <div style="border-right: medium none; border-width: 1pt > medium medium; border-style: solid none none; > border-color: rgb(181, 196, 223) -moz-use-text-color > -moz-use-text-color; padding: 3pt 0in 0in;"> > <p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size: 10pt; > font-family: > "Tahoma","sans-serif";">From:</span></b><span > style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: > "Tahoma","sans-serif";"> > <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org">mpls-bounces@ietf.org</a> [<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org">mailto:mpls-bounces@ietf.org</a>] <b>On > Behalf Of </b>Greg Mirsky<br> > <b>Sent:</b> Friday, March 11, 2011 9:14 PM<br> > <b>To:</b> Luca Martini<br> > <b>Cc:</b> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:lihan@chinamobile.com">lihan@chinamobile.com</a>; <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:mpls@ietf.org">mpls@ietf.org</a>; pwe3; > HUANG Feng F; <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:mpls-tp@ietf.org">mpls-tp@ietf.org</a><br> > <b>Subject:</b> Re: [mpls] WG LC > draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal-in-pw-00.txt<o:p></o:p></span></p> > </div> > </div> > <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> > <p class="MsoNormal">Dear Luca,<br> > thank you for bringing draft-nadeau-pwe3-vccv-2-01 to my > attention. I'll send my comments to it in a separate e-mail.<br> > I'll have to miss another opportunity to discuss your > proposal in a meeting. Please add my comments below to my > earlier expressed WG LC comments:<o:p></o:p></p> > <ul type="disc"> > <li class="MsoNormal" style="">the > draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal-in-pw-00 depends on any solution > that addresses applicability of GAL in PW VCCV, e.g. > solution proposed in draft-nadeau-pwe3-vccv-2-01;<o:p></o:p></li> > <li class="MsoNormal" style="">the > draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal-in-pw-00 needs to mention such > dependency and refer to any existing proposal;<o:p></o:p></li> > <li class="MsoNormal" style="">I believe that the > draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal-in-pw-00 can be advanced in lock > with document that addresses use of GAL in PW VCCV.<o:p></o:p></li> > </ul> > <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12pt;">Regards,<br> > Greg<o:p></o:p></p> > <div> > <p class="MsoNormal">On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 5:31 AM, Luca > Martini <<a moz-do-not-send="true" > href="mailto:lmartini@cisco.com">lmartini@cisco.com</a>> > wrote:<o:p></o:p></p> > <p class="MsoNormal">Greg ,<br> > Some<o:p></o:p></p> > <div> > <p class="MsoNormal"><br> > On 02/18/11 11:15, Greg Mirsky wrote:<br> > > Dear Luca,<br> > > I see at least two issues:<br> > ><br> > > * use of GAL for PW, in my view, is another > VCCV CC type that has<br> > > to be negotiated as described in RFC 5085.<br> > ><o:p></o:p></p> > </div> > <p class="MsoNormal">These are valid points, but this > document in question does not define,<br> > not discussed VCCV.<br> > We have since posted a draft that proposes a new VCCV mode > , and we<br> > welcome comments regarding that document.<br> > (draft-nadeau-pwe3-vccv-2-01.txt)<br> > <br> > > * use of GAL creates ambiguous situation when PW > CW is used. The<o:p></o:p></p> > <div> > <p class="MsoNormal">> benefit from extending GAL > in PW, as I see, is for PWs that are<br> > > not required to use PW CW. That might be a > good enough reason to<br> > > update RFC 5586 as proposed in the document > but we must address<br> > > use cases of GAL in PWs that require presence > PW CW. If we<br> > > prohibit or even discourage use of GAL for > these PWs that have<br> > > PW VCCV as native Associated Channel, then > architecture of ACh<br> > > for MPLS-TP PW not simplified as result of > adopting the proposal.<br> > ><br> > > Regard<o:p></o:p></p> > </div> > <p class="MsoNormal">Greg,<br> > The GAL is basically a notifier that the packet following > the end of the<br> > MPLS label stack, is explicitly defined as a G-ACH format.<br> > Normally the packet would be decoded as an IP packet , > unless the last<br> > label on the stack indicated otherwise.<br> > <br> > The GAL can certainly be applied to a PW OAM packet on a > PW that uses<br> > the CW, and this document does not define that , nor > restricts it.<br> > <br> > The scope of this document is limited to removing an > unnecessary<br> > restriction in rfc5586, hence this comment not applicable > to this document.<br> > <br> > Thanks.<br> > Luca<o:p></o:p></p> > <div> > <p class="MsoNormal"><br> > > s,<br> > > Greg<br> > ><br> > > On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 7:46 AM, Luca Martini <<a > moz-do-not-send="true" > href="mailto:lmartini@cisco.com">lmartini@cisco.com</a><o:p></o:p></p> > </div> > <div> > <p class="MsoNormal">> <mailto:<a > moz-do-not-send="true" > href="mailto:lmartini@cisco.com">lmartini@cisco.com</a>>> > wrote:<br> > ><br> > > Greg,<br> > ><br> > > Sorry, but I do not remember the point you > mention.<br> > > Can you explain again here ?<br> > > Thanks.<br> > > Luca<br> > ><br> > ><br> > > On 02/17/11 23:47, Greg Mirsky wrote:<br> > > > Dear Authors and All,<br> > > > prior to the meeting in Bejing and > acceptance of this proposal as WG<br> > > > document Luca and I agreed that use of GAL > with PW VCCV presents a<br> > > > problem.<br> > > > I was not attending the IETF-79, nor I > found discussion of this<br> > > issue<br> > > > in the minutes. I think that this issue > should be specified,<br> > > > explained. In my view, this document > updates not only RFC 5586<br> > > > but RFC 5085 too.<br> > > ><br> > > > Regards,<br> > > > Greg<br> > > ><br> > > > Comment to > draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal-in-pw-00.txt<br> > > ><br> > > > On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 10:14 AM, Luca > Martini<br> > > <<a moz-do-not-send="true" > href="mailto:lmartini@cisco.com">lmartini@cisco.com</a> > <mailto:<a moz-do-not-send="true" > href="mailto:lmartini@cisco.com">lmartini@cisco.com</a>><o:p></o:p></p> > </div> > <div> > <div> > <p class="MsoNormal">> > <mailto:<a > moz-do-not-send="true" > href="mailto:lmartini@cisco.com">lmartini@cisco.com</a> > <mailto:<a moz-do-not-send="true" > href="mailto:lmartini@cisco.com">lmartini@cisco.com</a>>>> > wrote:<br> > > ><br> > > > Greg,<br> > > ><br> > > > You are correct , the proposed > update does not propose any<br> > > changes<br> > > > to VCCV.<br> > > > However the problem with vccv is not > as simple as to ask for<br> > > a new<br> > > > code point from IANA.<br> > > > Given the good amount of discussion > on this point, we should<br> > > > probably have a discussion in > Beijing.<br> > > ><br> > > > Luca<br> > > ><br> > > ><br> > > ><br> > > > On 10/29/2010 05:07 PM, Greg Mirsky > wrote:<br> > > >> Dear Authors,<br> > > >> I think that proposed update of > the Section 4.2. RFC 5586<br> > > makes it possible<br> > > >> to use GAL on MPLS-TP PW that > uses Control Word. I consider<br> > > it to be<br> > > >> conflict between PW VCCV CC > types because use of GAL is not<br> > > negotiated<br> > > >> through PW VCCV negotiation. To > avoid such situation I propose:<br> > > >><br> > > >> - in Section 5 request IANA > to assign new CC Type "MPLS<br> > > Generic<br> > > >> Associated Channel Label"<br> > > >> - assign precedence to new CC > Type that affects Section<br> > > 7 RFC 5085<br> > > >><br> > > >> Regards,<br> > > >> Greg<br> > > >><br> > > >><br> > > >><br> > > >> > _______________________________________________<br> > > >> mpls mailing list<o:p></o:p></p> > </div> > </div> > <p class="MsoNormal">> >> <a > moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:mpls@ietf.org">mpls@ietf.org</a> > <mailto:<a moz-do-not-send="true" > href="mailto:mpls@ietf.org">mpls@ietf.org</a>> > <mailto:<a moz-do-not-send="true" > href="mailto:mpls@ietf.org">mpls@ietf.org</a><o:p></o:p></p> > <div> > <div> > <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 12pt;">> > <mailto:<a moz-do-not-send="true" > href="mailto:mpls@ietf.org">mpls@ietf.org</a>>><br> > > >> <a moz-do-not-send="true" > href="https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls" > target="_blank">https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls</a><br> > > ><br> > > ><br> > > ><br> > > > > _______________________________________________<br> > > > mpls mailing list<br> > > > <a moz-do-not-send="true" > href="mailto:mpls@ietf.org">mpls@ietf.org</a> > <mailto:<a moz-do-not-send="true" > href="mailto:mpls@ietf.org">mpls@ietf.org</a>><br> > > > <a moz-do-not-send="true" > href="https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls" > target="_blank">https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls</a><br> > ><br> > ><o:p></o:p></p> > </div> > </div> > </div> > <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p> > </div> > </div> > <pre wrap=""> > <fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset> > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:mpls@ietf.org">mpls@ietf.org</a> > <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls">https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls</a> > </pre> > </blockquote> > <br> > <br> > <pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">-- > For corporate legal information go to: > > <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html">http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html</a> > > </pre> > </body> > </html> > > --------------050303000603040509070000-- > > --===============1692597272== > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Content-Disposition: inline > > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > --===============1692597272==--
- [PWE3] WG LC draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal-in-pw-00.t… Greg Mirsky
- Re: [PWE3] [mpls-tp] WG LC draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-… Alexander Vainshtein
- Re: [PWE3] [mpls-tp] WG LC draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-… neil.2.harrison
- Re: [PWE3] [mpls] WG LC draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal… Luca Martini
- Re: [PWE3] [mpls-tp] WG LC draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-… Shahram Davari
- Re: [PWE3] [mpls] WG LC draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal… Greg Mirsky
- Re: [PWE3] [mpls] WG LC draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal… Luca Martini
- Re: [PWE3] [mpls] WG LC draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal… Greg Mirsky
- Re: [PWE3] [mpls] WG LC draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal… Alexander Vainshtein
- Re: [PWE3] [mpls] WG LC draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal… venkatesan mahalingam
- Re: [PWE3] [mpls] WG LC draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal… Thomas Nadeau
- Re: [PWE3] [mpls] WG LC draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal… Alexander Vainshtein
- Re: [PWE3] [mpls] WG LC draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal… Lamberto Sterling
- Re: [PWE3] [mpls] WG LC draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal… Huang Feng
- Re: [PWE3] [mpls] WG LC draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal… Robert Rennison
- Re: [PWE3] [mpls] WG LC draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal… Stewart Bryant
- Re: [PWE3] [mpls] WG LC draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal… Curtis Villamizar
- Re: [PWE3] [mpls] WG LC draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal… Greg Mirsky
- [PWE3] MPLS 2011 International Conference - Call … Luyuan Fang (lufang)
- Re: [PWE3] [mpls-tp] [mpls] WG LC draft-lm-pwe3-m… Alexander Vainshtein
- Re: [PWE3] [mpls-tp] [mpls] WG LC draft-lm-pwe3-m… Greg Mirsky
- Re: [PWE3] [mpls-tp] [mpls] WG LC draft-lm-pwe3-m… Alexander Vainshtein
- Re: [PWE3] [mpls-tp] [mpls] WG LC draft-lm-pwe3-m… neil.2.harrison
- Re: [PWE3] [mpls-tp] [mpls] WG LC draft-lm-pwe3-m… Curtis Villamizar
- Re: [PWE3] [mpls-tp] [mpls] WG LC draft-lm-pwe3-m… Alexander Vainshtein
- Re: [PWE3] [mpls] WG LC draft-lm-pwe3-mpls-tp-gal… Curtis Villamizar