IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Teas] AD review of draft-ietf-teas-mpls-tp-rsvpte-ext-associated-lsp

"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Wed, 28 January 2015 22:22 UTC

Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
X-Original-To: teas@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: teas@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 134191A0358; Wed, 28 Jan 2015 14:22:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham
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 Eh_amq2nspIq; Wed, 28 Jan 2015 14:22:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from asmtp4.iomartmail.com (asmtp4.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.175]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1682C1A00D4; Wed, 28 Jan 2015 14:22:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from asmtp4.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp4.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t0SMMX0K023933; Wed, 28 Jan 2015 22:22:33 GMT
Received: from 950129200 (62-46-81-125.adsl.highway.telekom.at [62.46.81.125]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp4.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t0SMMVsC023923 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 28 Jan 2015 22:22:32 GMT
From: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: 'Lou Berger' <lberger@labn.net>, "'Rakesh Gandhi (rgandhi)'" <rgandhi@cisco.com>, draft-ietf-teas-mpls-tp-rsvpte-ext-associated-lsp.all@ietf.org
References: <D0ED027B.4D994%rgandhi@cisco.com> <54C79ADB.3090009@labn.net>
In-Reply-To: <54C79ADB.3090009@labn.net>
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 22:22:31 -0000
Message-ID: <08da01d03b48$e9219280$bb64b780$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQF9k63ie6NiALRXyzCvf+If3BfdFgMDBnsKnWNR5AA=
Content-Language: en-gb
X-TM-AS-MML: disable
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.1.0.1576-7.5.0.1018-21290.002
X-TM-AS-Result: No--0.543-10.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--0.543-10.0-31-10
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: lORh06tOiKg4HKI/yaqRm5F+9R8v7nzms+SyIdviDny67Q3uPo9KI0dC bIqupRRAWcrhFCwikTD4ZVqLH9zJt29PyFCtLnnLbMGKOuLn5FV9LQinZ4QefL6qvLNjDYTwfyj BJDnutUhQSFbL1bvQASdET58jp62ShEiggFNWnaRACvwCxQeWB5Y6ymVqv+liwXuSbUpmhsKyQJ T0cyLNAwkCnkA3h/n1D701dfVAizuSL9OvtUca/e6+D482nHhrnqg/VrSZEiM=
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/teas/NMGphpl2WspakQIJR2gTVHYyslk>
Cc: "'Alvaro Retana (aretana)'" <aretana@cisco.com>, teas@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Teas] AD review of draft-ietf-teas-mpls-tp-rsvpte-ext-associated-lsp
X-BeenThere: teas@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
List-Id: Traffic Engineering Architecture and Signaling working group discussion list <teas.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/teas>, <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/teas/>
List-Post: <mailto:teas@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas>, <mailto:teas-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 22:22:42 -0000

> 	Let's take a stab (off line) at language that addresses Adrian's
> comment and captures (our understanding) of the intent of the existing
> language, and then pass it around for review by all.  If you can take a
> stab at it and send it to me that would be best.

That sounds like a fine idea because Rakesh's latest email sounds like "the
reverse path LSP MUST NOT follow the same path as the forward path LSP" and I am
sure that you don't want to say that!

A

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email