Re: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01
Stewart Bryant <stbryant@cisco.com> Fri, 19 April 2002 09:54 UTC
From: Stewart Bryant <stbryant@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 10:54:12 +0100
Organization: Cisco Systems, Inc.
Lines: 115
Sender: pwe3-admin@ietf.org
References: <0D7FC1D8D861D511AEA70002A52CE5E601EC1FF6@zcard0ke.ca.nortel.com>
Reply-To: stbryant@cisco.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: pwe3@ietf.org
Return-path: <pwe3-admin@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en]C-CCK-MCD (Windows NT 5.0; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
To: Claude Kawa <kawa@nortelnetworks.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: pwe3-admin@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: Pseudo Wires Edge to Edge <pwe3.ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: pwe3@ietf.org
Status: O
X-Message-ID:
Message-ID: <20140418091553.2560.68929.ARCHIVE@ietfa.amsl.com>
> Claude Kawa wrote: > > I would like to propose changes to draft kamapabhava-01 taking into account the comments received > the last few days in order to progress this work. I will be able to produce a new draft in 2-3 > weeks (next week I am out of the office). > > Proposed changes to draft-kamapabhava-01: > > -Fragmentation is an important issue, if we cannot resolve it now I propose the following changes > to the FRoPW header: We encode bits I and L used to identified the fragments as 0 0 (0 0 means a > complete frame) and work on the solution without preventing the draft to progress. > > -The P bit used to identified the payload as user data or network management data, I propose that > we keep this bit with the following description: > > P - Payload Type (bit 3): > If set to zero then the payload field contains user's data else its > contents is not specified in this document. > > With this proposal, network and vendor may use P=1 in a proprietary way to carry whatever they > want to carry with the caveat that standardization of the use of P=1 in the future may obsolete > its proprietary use. > Reserving a bit with undefined behaviour does not make sense to me. Surely the right approach is to restore it to reserved MBZ as in Martini and when you have a defined behaviour, request that the group allocate you a bit from the reserved bits? Stewart > > With these two changes the header will look like: > > 0 1 2 3 > 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 > +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ > | Res |P|B|F|D|C|0|0| Length | Sequence Number | > +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ > > We have now the header in draft-martini (when P = 0). > > Now I will address emails proposing other changes/explanations. If I missed anything let met know. > > -Sasha email: > Item 1 was addressed above: " I have noticed that the FRoPW Control Word still > contains bit "P" that distinguishes user and maintenance > traffic - in spite of the maintenance protocol issue being > removed from the draft." > > Item 2: This one is about dropping frame out-of order vs. re-ordering them We can re-introduce > and improve the text of version 00: "Packets, which are received out of order, MAY be dropped or > reordered at > > the discretion of the receiver". > > Item 3: "The draft defines two modes of operation, but if only one of > them - port to port - is referred to as a "mode". What is more, > one mode (the same) is defined as OPTIONAL but neither is > defined as REQUIRED. Setting aside - for the moment - which mode > should be which, explicit names for all the modes and > explicit specification of the REQUIRED mode would be very > much in place. In particular, this would help with creating > a 'per mode' applicability statement (preferably inline - > the draft is not too long)". > > About what is optional and what is mandatory. I prefer to address this item later since we have IP > and L2TPv3 too in addition to MPLS tunnels. I propose that we do not specify what is mandatory and > what is optional now but wait to see the complete spec covering other tunnels. > > > Item 4: "The draft specifies a set of requirements for FRoPW. > Have you considered providing a check-list > matching these requirements with the design spec? > IMHO this would be very useful and (hopefully) not too > difficult (in the worst case you can always drop an > especially inconvenient requirement :-). > Personally I would like to understand how the requirement > for mapping the traffic management parameters is met > with this spec." > > We will check the requirements list against the design spec and drop/change what needs to be > dropped/changed. However for traffic management, it will take a little bit more time to address. > We will not do it in the next version if we produce it in 2-3 weeks as we propose. Traffic > management is definitely a high priority item. > > > > -Comment from George Wilkie about the control word: We will follow the suggestion in George's > email: > > "The doc appears to require the use of the FRoPW control word for all types of > PSN.I understand the need for MPLS, not clear to me for other PSNs, e.g. L2TPv3. > L2TPv3 can do without the control word since it has its own sequencing > capability and IP has no need for length field. > The DLCI can remain on the frame to carry the FBDC bits and avoid inefficient > copy out/in." > > -Next comments are from LLoyd Wood email that came today (Thursday) > > 1-We will address the use of IP tunnel. We have a placeholder for that but MPLS seemed to have a > higher priority. > > 2-About the security section we will use what is draft-bryant-pwe3-fr-encap. It looks good. > > 3-We will try to adopt other useful material from draft bryant complementing draft kamapabhava-01. > > Anything else I missed? > > Now I would like to propose to write a new version of kamapabhava with the above > changes/additions as a working group draft. > > Claude Kawa
- RE: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 Claude Kawa
- Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 Claude Kawa
- Re: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 W. Mark Townsley
- RE: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 Claude Kawa
- Re: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 Stewart Bryant
- RE: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 Andrew G. Malis
- RE: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 Claude Kawa
- Re: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 Danny McPherson
- RE: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 Shahram Davari
- RE: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 Khalid Ahmad
- Re: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 Danny McPherson
- Re: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 Danny McPherson
- RE: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 Khalid Ahmad
- RE: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 neil.2.harrison
- RE: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 neil.2.harrison
- RE: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 Andrew G. Malis
- Re: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 W. Mark Townsley
- Re: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 Giles Heron
- Re: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 Stewart Bryant
- Re: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 Eric Rosen
- Re: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 Giles Heron
- Re: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 Andrew G. Malis
- RE: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 Kavi, Prabhu
- Re: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 W. Mark Townsley
- Re: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 Luca Martini
- Re: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 Luca Martini
- Re: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 Luca Martini
- RE: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 Shahram Davari
- Re: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 W. Mark Townsley
- RE: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 Shahram Davari
- Re: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 Giles Heron
- Re: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 W. Mark Townsley
- Re: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 Stewart Bryant
- Re: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 Giles Heron
- Re: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 Luca Martini
- RE: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 neil.2.harrison
- Re: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 Luca Martini
- RE: Proposed changes to draft kamapabhava-01 neil.2.harrison