Re: [Tsvwg] I-D Action:draft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-user-error-spec-05.txt

Francois Le Faucheur IMAP <flefauch@cisco.com> Tue, 01 April 2008 16:14 UTC

Return-Path: <tsvwg-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: tsvwg-archive@optimus.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-tsvwg-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7B9D3A6EB2; Tue, 1 Apr 2008 09:14:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: tsvwg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tsvwg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B4B128C4AA for <tsvwg@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Apr 2008 09:14:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.449
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.150, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 14yWOk337+GQ for <tsvwg@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Apr 2008 09:14:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ams-iport-1.cisco.com (ams-iport-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.140]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05EA028C4C4 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Apr 2008 09:14:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,588,1199660400"; d="scan'208";a="5070026"
Received: from ams-dkim-1.cisco.com ([144.254.224.138]) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 01 Apr 2008 18:14:21 +0200
Received: from ams-core-1.cisco.com (ams-core-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.150]) by ams-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m31GELep026480 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Apr 2008 18:14:21 +0200
Received: from xbh-ams-332.emea.cisco.com (xbh-ams-332.cisco.com [144.254.231.87]) by ams-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m31GELWD022043 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Apr 2008 16:14:21 GMT
Received: from xfe-ams-331.emea.cisco.com ([144.254.231.72]) by xbh-ams-332.emea.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 1 Apr 2008 18:14:21 +0200
Received: from [144.254.53.198] ([144.254.53.198]) by xfe-ams-331.emea.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 1 Apr 2008 18:14:21 +0200
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v753)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <E390FA57-D02D-4982-964D-CE3292D86DD4@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; delsp="yes"; format="flowed"
To: tsvwg IETF list <tsvwg@ietf.org>
From: Francois Le Faucheur IMAP <flefauch@cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2008 18:14:13 +0200
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.753)
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Apr 2008 16:14:21.0082 (UTC) FILETIME=[71932FA0:01C89413]
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=1446; t=1207066461; x=1207930461; c=relaxed/simple; s=amsdkim1002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=flefauch@cisco.com; z=From:=20Francois=20Le=20Faucheur=20IMAP=20<flefauch@cisco. com> |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[Tsvwg]=20I-D=20Action=3Adraft-ietf-tsv wg-rsvp-user-error-spec-05.txt |Sender:=20; bh=EjnmSjPMxOIih6F/+beuH01Y87VFqxT3/ijW/mPGqh0=; b=IoX+K4+Ok6nrPhh/dBaHZ4efYtSXjiSKASYQrjFSLkixWIY3jOJsmdd3DU P4UehrK7cj4I+j+1wN1zmMPWm3Tv9hGixy4GPm6ybMxaAHulU2oQJh99HiAO vdRZPg8DfM;
Authentication-Results: ams-dkim-1; header.From=flefauch@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/amsdkim1002 verified; );
Subject: Re: [Tsvwg] I-D Action:draft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-user-error-spec-05.txt
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: tsvwg-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: tsvwg-bounces@ietf.org

Hi,

I think this document is ready to move forward.

One small suggestion perhaps. It probably wouldn't hurt to be  
explicit about the "Error Value" field of the ERROR_SPEC (when Error  
Code = "User Error Spec"). I understand this field is basically not  
to serve any purpose ("No Error Values are defined), suggesting a  
"MUST be set to zero on transmit and MUST be ignored on receipt" .

Francois


===============================================================
Updated after discussion with Jukka.
Adrian

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts  
directories.
Title           : User-Defined Errors for RSVP
Author(s)       : G. Swallow, A. Farrel
Filename        : draft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-user-error-spec-05.txt
Pages           : 8
Date            : 2008-04-01

The Resource ReserVation Protocol (RSVP) defines an ERROR_SPEC object
for communicating errors.  That object has a defined format that
permits the definition of 256 error codes.  As RSVP has been
developed and extended, the convention has been to be conservative in
defining new error codes.  Further, no provision for user-defined
errors exists in RSVP.

This document defines a USER_ERROR_SPEC to be used in addition to the
ERROR_SPEC to carry additional user information related to errors.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-tsvwg-rsvp-user-error- 
spec-05.txt