Label_Set and Channel_Set in draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-dcsc-channel-ext-01.txt

Remi Theillaud <remi.theillaud@marben-products.com> Tue, 31 March 2009 10:32 UTC

Envelope-to: ccamp-data0@psg.com
Delivery-date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 10:34:28 +0000
Message-ID: <49D1F121.1080105@marben-products.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 12:32:01 +0200
From: Remi Theillaud <remi.theillaud@marben-products.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ccamp@ops.ietf.org
Subject: Label_Set and Channel_Set in draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-dcsc-channel-ext-01.txt
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

  One question about a Label_Set containing Channel_Set labels:

  Let's consider the following LABEL_SET object. Labels are assumed to 
be two bytes Generalized labels (type 2) - such as the EVPL Generalized 
Label format defined in draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ether-svcs-03.txt.

   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
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |            Length             | Class-Num (36)|   C-Type (1)  |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |    Action(0)  |      Reserved     |        Label Type(4)      |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |    Action(2)  |Num Subchannels(2) |        Label Type(2)      |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |        Subchannel 1(100)      |        Subchannel 2(200)      |
  |-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |    Action(2)  |Num Subchannels(2) |        Label Type(2)      |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |        Subchannel 1(300)      |        Subchannel 2(400)      |
  |-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

  I can see two different interpretation of this LABEL_SET:

1. This LABEL_SET specifies a single subchannel, which uses the format 
of a Channel_Set label.The Channel_Set label consists of two ranges: 
100..200 and 300..400.  The purpose of this LABEL_SET would be to force 
the downstream node to send back a LABEL object that consists of range 
100..200 AND range 300..400.

2. This LABEL_SET specifies two subchannels, both using the format of a 
Channel_Set label. The first channel is the range 100..200; the second 
one is the range 300..400. The purpose of this LABEL_SET would be to 
force the downstream node to send back a LABEL object that consists 
either of range 100..200 OR range 300..400

  Which interpretation is the correct one? am I misunderstanding something?

  One way to remove the ambiguity would be to consider that the 
LABEL_SET object can contain only one Channel_Set label (case 1 is then 
the correct interpretation). And it would be possible (if needed) to 
handle case 2 by using two LABEL_SET objects in a Path message.
 
  RĂ©mi